Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/15/2015  Meeting Location: Municipal Center City of 7100 147th Street West Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 JULY 15, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION TENTATIVE AGENDA 7:00 P.M. This agenda is subject to change by deletion or addition to items until approved by the Planning Commission on the date of the meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 17, 2015 4. CONSENT ITEMS --NONE-- 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Village at Founders Circle 2nd Addition Public hearing to consider rezoning two parcels -- (PC15-24-ZSG) create one (1) platted lot. LOCATION: Generally southeast of Garrett Avenue and 153rd Street W. PETITIONER: Dakota County CDA 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. ISD 196 Transportation Hub Facility Consider subdivision by preliminary plat to create 10.22-acre parcel, conditional use permit for operation of bus storage and maintenance facility with screened outdoor storage area for no more than six (6) buses, and site plan review/building permit (PC15-20-SCBG) authorization to construct a transportation hub facility for 84 buses. LOCATION: Northeast corner of Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147th Street West PETITIONER: ISD 196 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Review of the Mixed Business Campus Comprehensive Plan Designation. B. Review of upcoming schedule and other updates. 8. ADJOURNMENT NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS Wednesday, August 5, 2015 Regular Scheduled Meeting 7:00 P.M. -Public hearing applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, July 8, 2015 -Site plan, variance applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Monday, July 27, 2015 Wednesday, August 19, 2015 Regular Scheduled Meeting 7:00 P.M. -Public hearing applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, July 22, 2015 -Site plan, variance applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Monday, August 10, 2015 NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Thursday, July 23, 2015 Regular Scheduled Meeting 7:00 P.M. Thursday, August 13, 2015 Informal 5:30 P.M. Regular Scheduled Meeting 7:00 P.M. Regular meetings are broadcast live on Charter Communications Cable, Channel 180. Agendas are also available on the City's Internet Web Site http://www.cityofapplevalley.org. 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Melander at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Tom Melander, Ken Alwin, Tim Burke, Keith Diekmann, Angela Polozun, Paul Scanlan and David Schindler. Members Absent: None Staff Present: City Attorney Michael Klemm, Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist, Planner Kathy Bodmer, Planner Margaret Dykes, Assistant City Engineer Brandon Anderson and Department Assistant Joan Murphy. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Melander asked if there were any changes to the agenda. Hearing none he called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Diekmann moved, seconded by Commissioner Scanlan, approving the agenda. Ayes - 6 - Nays - 0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES JUNE 3, 2015 Chair Melander asked if there were any changes to the minutes. Hearing none he called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Diekmann, approving the minutes of the meeting of June 3, 2015. Ayes - 6 - Nays — 0. 4. CONSENT ITEMS --NONE-- 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 17, 2015 A. Central Village West - Public hearing to consider zoning amendments to PD-739, Zone 4 to allow for publicly owned parking facilities; and rezoning of City-owned property located in the Central Village West area from PD-739, Zones 1 and 2 to PD-739. Zone 4. LOCATION: Generally northeast of Garrett Avenue and 153rd Street W. PETITIONER: City of Apple Valley CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 17, 2015 Page 2 of 7 Chair Melander opened the public hearing at 7:01 p.m. Commissioner Schindler arrived at 7:02 p.m. Planner Margaret Dykes stated the City of Apple Valley owns several parcels of tax - forfeited property in the Central Village West area, generally located northeast of Garrett Avenue and 153rd Street W. These properties are currently zoned "PD -739, Zones 1 and 2" (Planned Development). The properties were zoned according to an approved 2004 development plan. The development plan was later changed and properties replatted to their current configurations, but the original zoning boundaries remained in place with the understanding that they could be modified to accommodate new development proposals. The zone does not allow for commercial development. "PD 739, Zone 2" allows for commercial development, as well as multi - family residential development but the residential uses must be mixed in the same building as commercial uses. The properties are unlikely to develop as residential uses or an integrated mix of commercial and residential uses. "PD -739, Zone 4" would offer more flexibility by allowing stand -alone commercial and office uses. Staff also would like to amend this subzone to allow for publicly owned parking facilities. A proposal has been approved by the City Council to construct a 130 -space parking lot on the 1.64 -acre lot north of the Grandstay Hotel to provide for additional parking for the Central Village, and surrounding businesses. Chair Melander closed the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. MOTION: Commissioner Diekmann moved, seconded by Commissioner Scanlan, recommending approval of the draft ordinance amending PD -739, Zone 4 to allow for publicly owned parking facilities. Ayes - 7 - Nays — 0. MOTION: Commissioner Diekmann moved, seconded by Commissioner Scanlan, recommending approval of the draft ordinance rezoning the following properties from "PD-739, Zone 1" to "PD -739, Zone 4 (Planned Development): a. Parcel 1: Lot 1, Block 2, Village at Founders Circle (proposed parking lot) b. Parcel 2: Lot 1, Block 3, Village at Founders Circle c. Parcel 3: Lot 2, Block 3, Village at Founders Circle Ayes - 7 - Nays — 0. B. ISD 196 Transportation Hub Facility — Continue public hearing to consider subdivision by preliminary plat to create 10.22 -acre parcel, conditional use permit for operation of bus storage and maintenance facility with screened outdoor storage area for no more than six (6) buses, and site plan review /building permit authorization to construct a transportation hub facility for 84 buses. (PC15- 20 -SCBG) LOCATION: Northeast corner of Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147th Street West PETITIONER: ISD 196 Chair Melander continued the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 17, 2015 Page 3 of7 Planner Kathy Bodmer stated Independent School District 196 would like to construct a transportation hub facility on the northeast corner of Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147th Street West. The 60,000 sq. ft. facility would include a bus garage for storage of 84 buses, four bus maintenance bays, office, fenced temporary storage for a maximum of six buses, and a free standing bus wash and fueling area. She said the public hearing for the Transportation Hub was held at the Planning Commission May 20, 2015, meeting, and left open for further comments. There were several outstanding items that needed to be addressed. Since the time of the public hearing noise, traffic, facility operations and air quality have been further studied. The studies have provided the following information: • The arrival and departure of bus drivers and the school buses is dispersed in the a.m. and p.m. peaks. In contrast to shift work where a majority of the employees must punch a clock around the same time, the drivers and buses arrive and depart over a staggered period that ensures minimal stacking and idling within the site and on adjacent roadways. • Noise levels are expected to be the highest during the one -hour period between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. when all 84 buses return to the site and drive into the garage from the north overhead doors. During the morning peak, it is important that the north overhead doors remain closed to help screen the noise. • It is expected that 18 buses would depart from the Johnny Cake Ridge Road access point (west) and 66 buses would depart from the Upper 147th Street access point (south). During the day, approximately 2/3 of the fleet would be expected to return to the site and park in the garage or on the south side of the garage. • During the school year, peak traffic levels generated by the buses would be between 6:00 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. In the summer, the buses are expected to run between 7:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. with approximately 1/3 of the fleet (about 28 buses) in operation. It should be noted that the buses operate primarily Monday through Friday with only special event buses operating on weekends and during school holidays. • The noise study indicates that noise levels generated by the facility would be noticeable to the neighborhood compared to existing noise levels today. As a result, in order to help mitigate noise impacts, the noise study is recommending the installation of an 8' to 12' tall fence along the north property line. The noise generated by the facility would not exceed MPCA noise level requirements. • MPCA air emissions requirements would not be exceeded with this project. However, the MPCA recommends that the School District employ the following measures to ensure the best air quality: good bus maintenance, a bus replacement program, engine block heaters and use of cleaner fuels. • Traffic levels on Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147th Street are expected to increase as adjacent vacant parcels are developed. The City's Traffic Consultant reviewed the School District's Traffic Study and confirmed that the transportation hub traffic levels are consistent with the City's previous estimates. It is expected that the Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147th Street intersection would meet the warrants for a signalized intersection in the next few years. • The facility would be owned and managed by the School District, an entity that is accountable to the residents through the School Board. If issues arise, residents can appeal directly to the School Administration and School Board to address the concerns. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 17, 2015 Page 4 of 7 • The prevailing winds during the school year are primarily from the northwest; in the summer the prevailing winds are from the southeast when the Transportation Hub would be less busy. Staff is working on a list of conditions that could be placed on the conditional use permit to help minimize impacts to adjacent properties: • The transportation hub shall be screened from the residential properties to the north through a combination of an 8' to 12' tall articulated wood privacy fence with landscaping on both sides of the fence. • The north garage doors shall remain closed until after 8:00 a.m. • The garage doors on the maintenance bays and bus wash shall remain closed prior to 7:00 a.m. and after 8:00 p.m. • The color of the garage doors shall be compatible with the exterior building material color to help the doors to blend in with the building design. • The School District shall establish a contact person who would receive phone calls if neighboring properties have concerns and are negatively impacted. Commissioner Scanlan inquired if there would be landscaping on both sides of the screening wall and if there was a landscape maintenance plan that ISD 196 would be able to maintain on the resident's side of the wall. Ms. Bodmer answered that is an outstanding question rather the neighbors would embrace that as an opportunity for more landscaping. If not, there would be that 8' area that ISD 196 could access the back if they needed to. Commissioner Scanlan asked if it was still the intent of the City to meet with the residents who border the north property line. Ms. Bodmer said the City does intend to do that. Commissioner Scanlan asked about the wood material of the fence and if concrete would be a better choice for noise control and inquired if that option had been in discussion with the applicant. Ms. Bodmer answered that the noise studies indicated that it is height more than material that would provide the continuation of sound screening. She commented that what ISD 196 is doing by providing the articulated fence that would be a step up from just a straight wall. Commissioner Scanlan had a question on drawings that were submitted related to trash storage dumpster area and elevations. He inquired if the dumpster area would have a vinyl fence around it. Ms. Bodmer answered that dumpster materials are to be the surrounded by the same material as the exterior of the buildings. Commissioner Scanlan questioned if the screening for the outdoor storage of the buses should not be the same material as the building as the dumpster area. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 17, 2015 Page 5 of 7 Ms. Bodmer stated it is not uncommon for outdoor areas to have vinyl fencing for outdoor storage area and commented there are several others in the City. She said it is a fairly small storage area and fairly small fence and staff is not concerned with this. Commissioner Scanlan asked if that would be coordinated in color with the rest of the building. Ms. Bodmer answered that it would need to be. Commissioner Schindler inquired what the purpose of the outdoor storage area was. Ms. Bodmer answered that the purpose is in the case that a bus needs repair and is out of commission because it does not have a part. The bus garage has a time flow and the concern would be that the bus could get in the way of normal day to day functioning of the garage. Commissioner Schindler asked if the garage could be extended by a couple more lanes and have parking storage inside. Ms. Bodmer said ISD 196 would need to answer that question. Commissioner Burke asked who makes the choice of an 8' vs 12' fence height. Ms. Bodmer answered that would be part of the conversation. Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist stated staff would continue to work with the adjacent property owners as to what they prefer. He added that the difference between an 8' fence vs a 12' fence is 2 - 3 decibels. Chair Melander inquired about measuring standards regarding noise levels. Ms. Bodmer commented she could bring a chart to the next meeting as it relates to noise levels. Chair Melander clarified that the public hearing was held open to get revisions and answers to questions. The wall that is talked about tonight is what we are considering. He asked if there were no other changes and nothing else had been revised. Ms. Bodmer answered yes and that some of the final changes would be addressing some of the engineering issues because there was concern as to the access points and how they might impact. Scott McQueen, Wold Architects, provided additional information. He described the function of the outdoor storage area as it relates to bus repairs. He reviewed the fence material and landscaping. Commissioner Scanlan asked if returning buses in the evening had assigned locations in the bus garage. His concern was if one bus driver arrived before another that they would not be sitting in the back of the garage idling while waiting for another bus to arrive and park. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 17, 2015 Page 6 of 7 Mr. McQueen commented that ISD 196 also does not want the drivers idling the buses either but rather reduce driver time and conserve fuel consumption. He referred to the transportation coordinator to answer. Randy Dukek, Transportation Coordinator for ISD 196, described driver routes and how buses would depart from the garage and return to the garage. Commissioner Scanlan inquired as to the amount of noise that would come out of the maintenance bay if the doors could be shut and it could reduce the height of the wall. Mike Erdmann, 5936 - 144th Street W., said he researched bus garages in other communities. He commented he did not have time to get appraisal values and realtor estimates for property values from licensed professionals. Chair Melander stated the Planning Commission does not have the authority or obligation to consider property values. He said that is a City Council issue. Mr. Erdmann expressed concerns for buses entering and exiting the property and large beeping sounds necessary for backing up. He commented that with an 8' fence residents would still be able to see the buses. He had concerns for the garage doors staying open. He showed pictures of bus garages from other communities. He requested to have the public hearing extended for more comments and would like to have more discussion on the fence. Chair Melander commented that the Planning Commission can only consider the land use application presented before them. Commissioner Diekmann commented that this land is an industrial zone and asked Mr. Erdmann what type of industrial application would be suitable to him if it is not this. Mr. Erdmann answered there are a lot of different uses listed in the description of the zoning ordinance and he thought this application represented one of the worst case scenarios. His impression since he moved into his house he thought it would be a storage and freight operation. Something that is stored is a lot quieter and does not have wheels on them. He would prefer something that is a lot less busy and not a bus facility. Cheryl Cabak, 5980 — 144th Street W., asked how the exhaust would be piped and where it was going to. She heard about decibels but not the hertz. David Garthune, 5887 - 144th Street W., referenced a letter written to Mr. Nordquist by Jeffrey Solomon from ISD 196 regarding why this site was selected. He feels the letter raises more questions than answers. Chair Melander commented that the Planning Commission is considering the site that was selected and not any other site. The application is for this site in particular. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes June 17, 2015 Page 7 of 7 Kelly Kausel, 14414 Everest Ave, expressed concerns for traffic and noise of the beeping. She feels cars will use their road to avoid the four -way stop. Randy Dukek, Transportation Coordinator for ISD 196, commented that school buses are not required to have a back -up alarm so they do not order the buses with them. ISD 196 has a few smaller vehicles that were made with them but that is just a handful of them. The only horn that will be heard is part of the safety check to see that the horn works. Back -up beepers and horns to back up would not be occurring at this facility. Chair Melander closed the public hearing at 8:55 p.m. 6. LAND USE /ACTION ITEMS -- NONE -- 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Review of upcoming schedule and other updates. Community Development Director Bruce Nordquist stated that the next Planning Commission meeting would take place Wednesday, July 15, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further comments from the Planning Staff or Planning Commission, Chair Melander asked for a motion to adjourn. MOTION: Commissioner Alwin moved, seconded by Commissioner Schindler to adjourn the meeting at 8:57 p.m. Ayes - 7 - Nays - 0. Respectfully Submitted, tt n Murphy, Planning De artme . ssistant Approved by the Apple Valley Planning Commission on PROJECT NAME: Village at Founders Circle 2 Addition PROJECT DESCRIPTION: • Rezone two parcels totaling 4.78 acres from "PD-739, Zones 1 and 2" to "PD-739, Zone 1". • Subdivision by preliminary plat to create one (1) lot. STAFF CONTACT: Margaret Dykes, Planner DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: Community Development Department APPLICANT: Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) PROJECT NUMBER: PC 15- 24 -ZPG APPLICATION DATE June 17, 2015 60 DAYS: August 15, 2015 120 DAYS: October 14, 2015 city of Apple Vauiey ITEM: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: SECTION: 5A July 15, 2015 Public Hearing Action Requested • Open the public hearing, receive comments, and close the hearing. It is the policy of the Planning Commission not to act on an item the same night as its public hearing. Project Summary /Issues The Dakota County CDA, the property owner of two parcels totaling 4.78 acres generally southeast of the intersection of Garrett Avenue and 153 Street W., is the following actions: • Rezone the property to allow for stand -alone high- density residential development; and • Replat the two existing parcels into one lot of record. The property is to be platted as Lot 1, Block 1, Village at Founders Circle 2 Addition. The CDA is not proposing any development at this time. An existing agreement between the CDA and the City states development will not occur before 2017 due to the other multi- family residential projects in the Central Village currently under construction. This will allow these other multi- family developments to be absorbed by the market before the subject parcels are developed. Zoning: The two properties are currently zoned "Planned Development 739, Zones 1 and 2 ". The properties were zoned according to an approved 2004 development plan. "PD-739, Zone 1" allows only for multi - family residential development as stand -alone uses. This zone does not allow for commercial development. "PD 739, Zone 2" allows for commercial development, as well as multi- family residential development but the residential uses must be mixed in the same building as commercial uses. Based on market data, the CDA believes the site should be rezoned to "PD-739, Zone 1. The CDA anticipates that the property could be developed in the future as a market -rate apartment building. Upon rezoning of the property, the CDA would pay the City $1.5 million towards assessments canceled against the parcels. Preliminary Plat: The proposed preliminary plat shows the combination of two existing parcels into one 4.78 -acre lot to be used for a future multi - family development. Right -of -way for abutting public roads (Garrett Avenue, Founders Lane, and Galaxie Avenue) had been previously dedicated with the Village at Founders Circle development. All public utilities are available to the site and have been installed. Sidewalks exist along Founders Lane and Galaxie Avenue. Sidewalk will be needed. along Garrett Avenue between Founders Lane and the sidewalk's current terminus on City property to the south. The existing predevelopment agreement executed between the City and the CDA states the City will install and pay for the missing sidewalk on Garrett Avenue. A trail is slated to be constructed from the subject site through the City stormwater pond to the south. This area has been graded in anticipation of the construction of the trail. A portion of the trail is proposed to be located on the subject property where it is to intersect with a planned future plaza. The City had received funding from the Metropolitan Council for the construction of this trail in the past, but the funding was returned because no project materialized. When the site develops in the future, it would be staffs intention to request authorization to apply for a grant for the construction of the trail. All public utilities are available to the site and have been installed. The preliminary plat shows appropriate utility easements; however, the City Engineer has advised that the drainage and utility easements in the center of the property also include a trail easement. Budget Impact None noted at this time. Attachment(s) 1. Area Map 2. Comprehensive Plan Map 2 H: \DEVELOPM\2015 Projects\Founders Circle 2nd Add \071515 PC memol .docx 3. Existing Zoning Map 5. Existing Conditions 4. Proposed Zoning Map 6. Preliminary Plat Property Location: Generally southeast of Garrett Avenue and 153 Street W. Legal Description: Outlot A, VILLAGE AT FOUNDERS CIRCLE, according to the recorded plat thereof, EXCEPTING THEREFROM: That part of Outlot A, VILLAGE AT FOUNDERS CIRCLE, according to the recorded plat thereof Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said OUTLOT A; thence South 89 degrees 44 minutes 28 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the South line of said OUTLOT A, said line also being the South line of the North 2259.86 feet of the Northwest Quarter of Section 34, a distance of 118.22 feet to the point of beginning; thence continuing South 89 degrees 44 minutes 28 seconds West, along said south line of OUTLOT A, a distance of 582.75 feet to the southwest corner of said OUTLOT A; thence North 00 degrees 36 minutes 33 seconds West, along a westerly line of said OUTLOT A, a distance of 1.10 feet, thence North 00 degrees 16 minutes 57 seconds East, along a westerly line of said OUTLOT A, a distance of 81.07 feet; thence South 89 degrees 43 minutes 03 seconds East a distance of 385.37 feet; thence North 44 degrees 57 minutes 45 seconds East a distance of 31.41 feet, thence South 45 degrees 02 minutes 15 seconds East a distance of 120.00 feet; thence North 44 degrees 57 minutes 48 seconds East a distance of 52.90 feet; thence South 45 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East a distance of 74.25 feet to the point of beginning. AND That part of the West 895.35 feet of the East 945.35 feet which lies south of the North 2259.86 feet of the Northwest Quarter of Section 34, Township 115, Range 20, Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of OUTLOT A, VILLAGE AT FOUNDERS CIRCLE according to the recorded plat thereof Dakota County, Minnesota; thence South 89 degrees 44 minutes 28 seconds West, assumed bearing, a distance of 118.22 feet along the South line of the North 2259.86 feet of the Northwest Quarter of Section 34, said line also being the South line of said OUTLOT A, to the point of beginning; thence South 45 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East a distance of 185.81 feet, thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds East a distance of 31.98 feet; thence South 42 degrees 02 minutes 53 seconds East a distance of 15.48 feet; thence North 89 degrees 47 minutes 32 seconds East a distance of 169.42 feet to the West line of Galaxie Avenue, said West line also being the East line of the West 895.35 feet of the East 945.35 feet of the Northwest Quarter of Section 34, thence North 00 degrees 11 minutes 15 seconds East, along said West line of Galaxie Avenue, a distance of 118.50 feet; thence South 89 degrees 47 minutes 32 seconds West a distance of 70.60 feet; thence northwesterly 134.49 feet along tangential curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 160.00 feet and a central angle of 48 degrees 09 minutes 35 seconds; thence North 42 degrees 02 minutes 53 seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 4.99 feet to the South line of said North 2259.86 feet; thence South 89 degrees 44 minutes 28 seconds West along said South line of said North 2259.86 feet and said south line of OUTLOT A, a distance of 118.22 feet to the point of beginning. Comprehensive Plan Designation "MIX" (Mixed Use) Zoning Classification "PD -739, Zones 1 & 2" (Planned Development) Existing Platting One parcel is a platted outlot, and the other is unplatted Current Land Use Vacant Size: 4.78 acres Topography: Relatively flat Existing Vegetation Grass Other Significant None identified Existing Conditions VILLAGE AT FOUNDER'S CIRCLE 2 ADDITION PROJECT REVIEW 3 H: \DEVELOPM\2015 Projects■Founders Circle 2nd Add \071515 PC memol.docx NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST Vacant Comprehensive Plan Zoning /Land Use City storm water pond Comprehensive Plan Zoning /Land Use Vacant Comprehensive Plan Zoning /Land Use Goodwill Comprehensive Plan Zoning /Land Use Natural Features Adjacent Properties/Land Uses Development Project Review: 4 H: \DEVELOPM\2015 Projects \Founders Circle 2nd Add \071515 PC memol.docx "MIX" (Mixed Use) "PD -739" (Planned Development) "MIX" (Mixed Use) "PD -739" (Planned Development) "MIX" (Mixed Use) "PD -739" (Planned Development) "C" (Commercial) "RB" (Retail Business) Comprehensive Plan: The subject lots are guided "MIX" (Mixed Use) in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The Mixed Use designation calls for a mix of retail and service businesses, office, medium and higher density residential, public uses, and parks and recreation uses. The development proposal is consistent with the Plan. Zoning: The two properties are currently zoned "Planned Development 739, Zones 1 and 2 ". The properties were zoned according to an approved 2004 development plan. The development plan was later changed and properties replatted to their current configurations, but the original zoning boundaries remained in place with the understanding that they could be modified to accommodate new development proposals. "PD -739, Zone 1" allows only for multi- family residential development as stand -alone uses. This zone does not allow for commercial development. "PD 739, Zone 2" allows for commercial development, as well as multi - family residential development but the residential uses must be mixed in the same building as commercial uses. Based on market data, the CDA believes the site should be rezoned to "PD -739, Zone 1. The CDA anticipates that the property could be developed in the future as a 168 -unit, market -rate apartment building. Construction would not likely begin until at least 2017 due to the other multi- family residential projects in the Central Village currently under construction. This will allow these other multi- family developments to be absorbed by the market before the subject parcels are developed. The CDA anticipates no more than 45% of the units (76 units) would have rent or income restrictions. Upon rezoning of the property, the CDA would pay the City $1.5 million towards assessments canceled against the parcels. Preliminary Plat: The proposed preliminary plat shows the combination of two existing parcels into one 4.78 -acre lot to be used for a future multi - family development. Right -of -way for abutting public roads (Garrett Avenue, Founders Lane, and Galaxie Avenue) had been previously dedicated with the Village at Founders Circle development. Utilities: All public utilities are available to the site and have been installed. The preliminary plat shows appropriate utility easements; however, the City Engineer has advised that the drainage and utility easements in the center of the property also include a trail easement. Pedestrian Access: Sidewalks exist along Founders Lane and Galaxie Avenue. Sidewalk will be needed along Garrett Avenue between Founders Lane and the sidewalk's current terminus on City property to the south. An existing predevelopment agreement executed between the City and the CDA states the City will install and pay for the missing sidewalk on Garrett Avenue. A trail is slated to be constructed from the subject site through the City stormwater pond to the south. This area has been graded in anticipation of the construction of the trail. A portion of the trail is proposed to be located on the subject property where it is to intersect with a planned future plaza. The City had received funding from the Metropolitan Council for this trail in the past, but the funding was returned because no project materialized. When the site develops in the future, it would be staff's intention to request authorization to apply for a grant for the construction of the trail. Public Hearing Comments: To be taken. 5 H: \DEVELOPM\2015 Projects\Founders Circle 2nd Add \071515 PC memol .docx e 1464411W m:m■■=isi 455T-H-ST-W GARNET WA NM FOUNDERS CIRCLE 2ND EXISTING ZONING MAP "PD -739, Zone 1 & 2" (Planned Development) J PD -739 FOUNDERS CIRCLE 2ND PROPOSED ZONING MAP "PD -739, Zone 1" (Planned Development) arara ..; - .mo t' 1 r.' , ��.�� 3„1,1 ()Pt 3AV A r 17Ic 3 2N 11" V IN3K3sv3 Avian ONV 3OVNIV210 N CI I! C ciIHS N OflC (94 (;) 1 , I HUflCJ A3 D fitL JKb, zc 8 Village at Founders Circle 2Addition nd Presentation to the Planning Commission July 15, 2015 Request Rezone two parcels from “PD-739, Zones 1 • and 2” to “PD-739, Zone 1”. Subdivision by preliminary plat to create • one (1) lot. Dakota County CDA, property owner, is • applicant. No site plan. Development won’t occur before • 2017 due to existing agreement between City and CDA. Location Generally southeast of Garrett Avenue and Founders Lane Comprehensive Plan “MIX” (Mixed Use) Existing Zoning “PD-739, Zones 1 & 2” (Planned Development) 2004 Harmony Commons Plan Zoning –PD-739 Zone 1 Allows stand alone multi-family residential • Does not allow for mixed use buildings • Zone 2 Requires residential to be located in mixed use • building _________________________________________ CDA requesting rezoning so site is all Zone 1 • Market study indicates mixed use will not be • economically feasible on site. Proposed Zoning “PD-739, Zone 1” (Planned Development) Existing Conditions Preliminary Plat Village at Founders Circle 2 nd Addition Combination of two parcels to create 4.78-acre lot Recommended Action Open the public hearing, receive comments, • and close the hearing. It is the policy of the Planning Commission not to act • on an item the same night as its public hearing. Questions? tg Oat* tft4tOtt .0400 0.0 Apple City of REVISED MOTIONS ITEM: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: SECTION: 1 6 July 15, 2015 Land Use PROJECT NAME: ISD 196 Transportation Hub Facility PROJECT DESCRIPTION Independent School District 196 requests consideration of a subdivision by preliminary plat to create a new lot, conditional use permit for operation of a bus storage and maintenance facility, conditional use permit for a screened temporary storage area for a maximum of six buses, and site plan review/building permit authorization for construction of a bus storage and maintenance facility on the northeast corner of Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147 Street West. STAFF CONTACT: Kathy Bodmer, Planner APPLICANT: Independent School District 196 APPLICATION DATE: April 29, 2015 60 DAYS: June 27, 2015 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Community Development Department PROJECT NUMBER: PC15-20-SCBG 120 DAYS: August 26, 2015 Proposed Action The Planning Commission could take one of three actions: recommend approval of the project with conditions, recommend denial of the project with findings, or direct staff and the petitioner to obtain additional information for consideration at the August 5, 2015. Note: The project review calendar requires the Planning Commission to act by the August 5, 2015, meeting. To recommend approval of the ISD 196 Transportation Hub project, the following motions and conditions are suggested: 1. Recommend approval of the subdivision by preliminary plat of Eagle Ridge Business Park Second Addition, subject to compliance with all City Codes and Ordinances and the following conditions: a. A minimum 10' drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated behind Evendale Way right-of-way on Outlot A. b. A cash-in-lieu of land parkland dedication shall be required in accordance with the City's dedication formula in the subdivision ordinance. c. Stormwater pond dedication has been previously satisfied. d. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated for a future well site and water main as noted in the Assistant City Engineer's memo of June 12, 2015. e. A development agreement between the School District and City which provides the terms and conditions of the installation and payment of the cost for future road improvements which may be needed when the facility expands in the future shall be executed and recorded as a condition of the final plat approval. 2. Recommend approval of a conditional use permit to construct a 60,000 sq. ft. transportation hub facility including bus storage, bus maintenance, fueling and bus wash, subject to approval of the Preliminary Plat of Eagle Ridge Second Addition, and compliance with all City Code and Ordinances and the following conditions: REVISED MOTIONS a. The transportation hub shall be screened from the residential properties to the north by a 12' tall articulated wood privacy fence with landscaping on both sides of the fence as depicted in the July 6, 2015, fence location plan. The final fence location and planting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planner prior to issuance of the building permit. b. The north garage doors of the bus garage shall remain closed during operating hours except when an individual bus es are enters ing the garage from the north. After the bus enters the garage, the north door shall be closed. c. The garage doors on the maintenance bays and bus wash shall remain closed prior to 7:00 a.m. and after 8:00 p.m. The doors may be opened during this time, but then closed once the vehicle has been parked in the garage enters the bus wash or repair bay. d. The School District shall establish a contact person who will receive phone calls if neighboring properties have concerns regarding the Transportation Hub facility. e. The facility operating hours shall be limited to 5:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. 3. Recommend approval of a conditional use permit to construct a 2,700 sq. ft. storage area for a maximum of 6 buses, subject to approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the Operation of a Bus Storage and Maintenance Facility and compliance with all City Codes and Ordinances and the following conditions: a. The outdoor area shall be paved. b. An 8' tall maintenance-free fence shall be used to screen the storage area. c. The overnight storage of buses shall be limited to the screened storage area. 4. Recommend approval of the site plan and give building permit authorization subject to the approval of the Preliminary Plat of Eagle Ridge Second Addition and a Conditional Use Permit to Operate a Bus Maintenance and Storage Facility and compliance with all City Codes and Ordinances and the following conditions: a. In accordance with § 155.351(E), the City authorizes the construction of the 12' articulated fence along the north property line to screen the site from the residential properties to the north. b. The garage doors shall be painted a color that complements the color of the exterior building material color. c. The garage doors shall be insulated and constructed of an inside and outside layer of 25 gage steel with 2" polystyrene between for insulation. d. Air handling units shall be installed on the south side of the bus garage which are sized to allow for the buses to idle during the pre-trip safety check with the north garage doors closed. e. The north fence shall be installed after site grading and prior to construction to screen the residential properties to the north. f. The plans shall be revised to address the issues identified in the Assistant City Engineer's June 12, 2015, memo. 2 PROJECT NAME: ISD 196 Transportation Hub Facility PROJECT DESCRIPTION Independent School District 196 requests consideration of a subdivision by preliminary plat to create a new lot, conditional use permit for operation of a bus storage and maintenance facility, conditional use permit for a screened temporary storage area for a maximum of six buses, and site plan review /building permit authorization for construction of a bus storage and maintenance facility on the northeast corner of Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147 Street West. STAFF CONTACT: Kathy Bodmer, Planner DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: Community Development Department APPLICANT: Independent School District 196 PROJECT NUMBER: PC15-20-SCBG APPLICATION DATE: 60 DAYS: 120 DAYS: April 29, 2015 June 27, 2015 August 26, 2015 00000 City of Apple Valley ITEM: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: SECTION: 6A July 15, 2015 Land Use Proposed Action The Planning Commission could take one of three actions: recommend approval of the project with conditions, recommend denial of the project with findings, or direct staff and the petitioner to obtain additional information for consideration at the August 5, 2015. Note: The project review calendar requires the Planning Commission to act by the August 5, 2015, meeting. To recommend approval of the ISD 1.96 Transportation Hub project, the following motions and conditions are suggested: 1. Recommend approval of the subdivision by preliminary plat of Eagle Ridge Business Park Second Addition, subject to compliance with all City Codes and Ordinances and the following conditions: a. A minimum 1.0' drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated behind Evendale Way right -of -way on Outlot A. b. A cash -in -lieu of land parkland dedication shall be required in accordance with the City's dedication formula in the subdivision ordinance. c. Stormwater pond dedication has been previously satisfied. d. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated for a future well site and water main as noted in the Assistant City Engineer's memo of June 12, 2015. e. A development agreement between the School District and City which provides the terms and conditions of the installation and payment of the cost for future road improvements which may be needed when the facility expands in the future shall be executed and recorded as a condition of the final plat approval. 2. Recommend approval of a conditional use permit to construct a 60,000 sq. ft. transportation hub facility including bus storage, bus maintenance, fueling and bus wash, subject to approval of the Preliminary Plat of Eagle Ridge Second Addition, and compliance with all City Code and Ordinances and the following conditions: a. The transportation hub shall be screened from the residential properties to the north by a 12' tall articulated wood privacy fence with landscaping on both sides of the fence as depicted in the July 6, 2015, fence location plan. The final fence location and planting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planner prior to issuance of the building permit. b. The north garage doors of the bus garage shall remain closed during operating hours except when buses are entering the garage. c. The garage doors on the maintenance bays and bus wash shall remain closed prior to 7:00 a.m. and after 8:00 p.m. The doors may be opened during this time, but then closed once the vehicle has been parked in the garage.The School District shall establish a contact person who will receive phone calls if neighboring properties have concerns regarding the Transportation Hub facility. d. The facility operating hours shall be limited to 5:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. 3. Recommend approval of a conditional use permit to construct a 2,700 sq. ft. storage area for a maximum of 6 buses, subject to approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the Operation of a Bus Storage and Maintenance Facility and compliance with all City Codes and Ordinances and the following conditions: a. The outdoor area shall be paved. b. An 8' tall maintenance -free fence shall be used to screen the storage area. c. The overnight storage of buses shall be limited to the screened storage area. 4. Recommend approval of the site plan and give building permit authorization subject to the approval of the Preliminary Plat of Eagle Ridge Second Addition and a Conditional Use Permit to Operate a Bus Maintenance and Storage Facility and compliance with all City Codes and Ordinances and the following conditions: a. In accordance with § 15 5.3 51(E), the City authorizes the construction of the 12' articulated fence along the north property line to screen the site from the residential properties to the north. b. The garage doors shall be painted a color that complements the color of the exterior building material color. c. The garage doors shall be insulated and constructed of an inside and outside layer of 25 gage steel with 2" polystyrene between for insulation. d. Air handling units shall be installed on the south side of the bus garage which are sized to allow for the buses to idle during the pre -trip safety check with the north garage doors closed. e. The north fence shall be installed after site grading and prior to construction to screen the residential properties to the north. f. The plans shall be revised to address the issues identified in the Assistant City Engineer's June 12, 2015, memo. Project Summary /Issues Independent School District 196 submitted an application to construct a transportation hub facility on the northeast corner of Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147 Street West. The 60,000 sq. ft. facility would include a bus garage for storage of 84 buses, four bus maintenance bays, office, fenced temporary storage for a maximum of six buses, and a free standing bus wash and fueling area. The public hearing for the Transportation Hub was held at the Planning Commission's May 20, 2015, meeting, held open for additional comments, and then closed at the June 17, 2015 meeting. There were several outstanding items that needed to be addressed. Since the time of the public hearing, meetings have been held with neighboring property owners to obtain feedback on the height of the screening fence along the north property line. Most of the neighbors stated, if the project is approved, a 12' tall fence is preferred to best screen the development from the neighborhood. Other neighbors recently stated they preferred an 8' tall fence, so more discussion is needed. The neighbors state that they continue to be concerned about the 2 proposed development. The primary concern raised by the neighborhood is the issue of the operation of the facility and whether it is compatible with adjacent residential neighborhoods. Other bus facilities were visited and they were found to be busy and noisy and operated at all hours. In addition, several other questions and issues were raised. Attached is a full point by point list of questions/concerns raised along with responses related to the following topics: Budget Impact None. 1. Bus facility operations. 2. Zoning/Ordinance Issues 3. Site selection 4. Landscape Plan 5. Noise and the noise study 6. Screening fence 7. Traffic study 8. Property values 9. Frustration with review process 10. Petition 11. Miscellaneous Attachment(s) 1. Engineering Memo 10. Grading & Drainage 17. Distance from Residential 2. ISD 196 Letter 11. Utility Plan 18. Prevailing Winds 3. MPCA Letter 12. Landscape Plan 19. Bus Distribution - A.M. 4. Location Map 13. Elevation Drawings 20. Easement Needs for Prelim. Plat 5. Comp Plan Map 14. Floor Plan 21. Oblique Aerial Study 6. Zoning Map 15. Lighting Plan North 22. David Braslau Follow-Up 7. Site Renderings Fence Alignment Reports 8. Preliminary Plat 16. Fence Cross Section 23. Resident Correspondence/Petition 9. Site Plan Study 3 Property Location: Northeast comer of Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147 Street West Legal Description: Outlot A, EAGLE RIDGE BUSINESS PARK, City of Apple Valley, Dakota County, Minnesota. Abstract Property And That part of Evendale Way, as dedicated in the plat of EAGLE RIDGE BUSINESS PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying northwesterly of the following described line: Beginning at the northwest comer of Lot 1, Block 1, said EAGLE RIDGE BUSINESS PARK; thence North 73 degrees 01 minutes 52 seconds East, on an assumed bearing along the northerly line of said Lot 1, a distance of 160.59 feet to a point of curve in said northerly line, thence easterly and southeasterly a distance of 113.76 feet, along said northerly line, to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence north 73 degrees 01 minutes 52 seconds East, not tangent to said curve, to the easterly line of said Evendale Way and said line there terminating. Comprehensive Plan Designation IND- Industrial Zoning Classification I -1 Limited Industrial Existing Platting Parcel platted as an outlot. Subdivision will create one lot for development and one lot for future development. Current Land Use Cultivated cropland. Size: Lot 1, Block 1= 10.22 acres Outlot A = 5.63 acres Total = 15.85 acres Topography: Site slightly decreases in elevation from north to south. Existing Vegetation Cropland with some native grasses. Other Significant Natural Features N/A Adjacent Properties/Land Uses NORTH Scottsbriar 2nd Comprehensive Plan LD -Low Density Residential (0 -6 units /acre) Zoning/Land Use PD — 342, Zone 1 (Single family) SOUTH Wirsbo 3 Addn (Uponor) Comprehensive Plan IND (Industrial) Zoning/Land Use I -1 (Limited Industrial) EAST Eagle Ridge Business Park (Lifeworks & Vacant) & Mistwood Comprehensive Plan IND (Industrial) and MD (Med. Density Res' 1, 6 -12 units /acre) Zoning/Land Use I -1 (Limited Industrial) and M -5C (Multi fam, 6 -10 units /acre) WEST Former Hanson Concrete Comprehensive Plan IND (Industrial) Zoning/Land Use I -2 (General Industrial) Existing Conditions ISD 196 TRANSPORTATION HUB FACILITY PROJECT REVIEW 4 Development Project Review Comprehensive Plan: The City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan guides the development of this site for "IND" (Industrial) uses. A bus storage and maintenance facility is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation. However, the site is immediately adjacent to the Scottsbriar neighborhood which raises the following issues addressed in the Comp Plan: 1. "An important value of the City is to preserve the vitality, social interaction and cohesiveness of residential neighborhoods. One technique that can support this value is to require buffers to protect property values, provide neighborhood identification and promote aesthetically pleasing developments (p. 4 -4). 2. "Desirable uses in employment areas should consist of office, office- showroom, services, medical, health care, research and development and forms of light industrial land use that produce minimal noise, odor, or other forms of pollution. Undesirable uses are those that have high levels of noise, traffic congestion, odor, dust, vibration, lighting, and unmitigated contamination (pp. 4 -5 to 4 -6)." Zoning: The property is zoned "I -1" (Limited Industrial). A bus storage and maintenance facility is not listed as a permitted or conditional use in the zoning district. However, a "truck and freight terminal and maintenance garage[]" is listed as a conditional use and is a similar use as a bus storage and maintenance facility. Thus, a conditional use permit is needed for the transportation hub. A conditional use is defined in the zoning code as a use that is "... generally not suitable in a particular zoning district, but which may, under some circumstances, be suitable." A conditional use permit is appropriate "if it is determined that the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the comprehensive guide plan and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and would not be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity." The zoning code requires screening of an industrial use that is within 100' of property zoned for residential use. A 12' articulated wood panel fence is proposed along the north property line. Preliminary Plat: The preliminary plat of Eagle Ridge Second Addition involves the subdivision of the exiting 15.8 -acre property to create a 10.2 -acre lot for the transportation facility and a 5.6 -acre outlot for future development east of Evendale Way. ISD 1.96 and the property owner propose to not extend Evendale Way out to Pilot Knob Road as previously planned, so Evendale Way would be terminated in a cul -de -sac. The property owner has submitted an application for vacation of the portion of the right -of -way previously dedicated north of the pipeline easement. The vacation hearing is scheduled to be held at the July 23, 2015, City Council meeting. The City Engineers are reviewing the dedication to ensure it is sufficient size for a commercial cul -de -sac. Easements will also be needed for the future well and water main as indicated in the Assistant City Engineer's memo. Site Plan: Fence plans were presented to the neighbors abutting the subject property to the north and most of them indicated that they preferred a 12' rather than 8' tall screening fence along the north property line to provide the best visual screening. Some property owners are indicating that they would prefer a shorter fence. The paneled wood fence is proposed to have off -sets and articulation which will allow landscaping to be installed on both sides of the fence. The south property line of the Scottsbriar properties abutting the site has a continuous 4' high berm which will help to screen the view of the fence. 5 The approximately 60,000 sq. ft. transportation hub is proposed to consist of a bus storage area, maintenance bays and office area. The 45,700 sq. ft. bus storage area would store 84 buses, 28 buses across and three buses deep. A total of 14 garage doors (six buses behind each door) will be visible on both the north side and south side of the building. The office area would be approximately 6,000 sq. ft. and provide open office, meeting space, lockers and break room for the drivers. The maintenance facility would be approximately 8,300 sq. ft. with two overhead doors each on the east and west elevations and one overhead door on the south elevation for deliveries. In addition to the bus storage facility, a detached 2,700 sq. ft. bus wash bay and fueling depot are also shown to be constructed on the site. Three access points are shown to the site: a right -out only access onto Johnny Cake Ridge Road and full access onto Upper 147 Street West and Evendale Way. The primary entrance to the site will be the Upper 147 Street West driveway. A total of 126 parking spaces are needed on the site for the drivers, office and maintenance staff; a total of 152 spaces are provided. A 2,700 sq. ft. screened area is shown on the east end of the bus garage for temporary storage of a maximum of six buses awaiting repairs. Outdoor storage requires a conditional use permit (CUP). The outdoor storage area is shown screened with an 8' tall vinyl privacy fence. Grading Plan: The site is relatively flat. The north property line has been staked and the location of the 4' tall berm is found to be completely on the residential properties to the north. No additional berming is proposed. A Natural Resources Management Permit (NRMP) will be required prior to any land disturbing activity on the site. The entire property was previously cultivated for crops, so permanent vegetative cover will be required for the Transportation Hub property. A skimmer will be required in the catch basins adjacent to the fuel island. See Assistant City Engineer memo for additional issues and requirements. Utilities Plan: Utilities are available to the site. It will be the responsibility of the School District to obtain the permits and licenses necessary from the pipeline easement holders to extend the utilities under the pipeline easement. A future raw water line will be extended from the City's proposed new well to the west out to Johnny Cake Ridge Road. A 15' easement will likely be needed along the north property line. Landscape Plan: The minimum value of landscape materials required on the site will be 1-1/2% the value of the construction of the building based on Means Construction Data. The landscape plan was revised to show the installation of a 12' tall screening fence along the north property line with plantings installed on both sides of the fence. Elevation Drawings: The exterior of the building will consist of insulated garage doors, decorative concrete block, metal fascia panels and metal roof. The clearstory window along the length of the bus storage facility facing south has been removed, reducing the height of the garage by two feet. The posts between the garage doors are constructed of decorative masonry block. The exterior of the detached wash bay will be decorative masonry block. A canopy will be installed over the fueling area. Street Classifications /Accesses /Circulation: • Johnny Cake Ridge Road: Major Collector with 100' right -of -way. Current traffic volume (2010) is 7,500 trips /day. Future (2030) traffic volumes are estimated to be 16,300 trips /day. A right -out only access is proposed from the site onto Johnny Cake Ridge Road which has been moved north as required by the Assistant City Engineer. • Upper 147 Street West: Minor Collector with 100' right -of -way. Current traffic volume (2013) is estimated to be 2,705 trips /day. Future volumes on this segment of Upper 147 Street were not estimated for the 2030 Comp Plan update. 6 • Evendale Way: Local street with 60' right -of -way. Because Evendale will not be extended to the west, the property owner will request that Evendale Way be terminated south of the pipeline easement with a cul -de -sac. They will request that the City vacate the portion of right -of -way north of the cul -de -sac. Vacation requests are reviewed directly by City Council. The traffic study conducted by Wenk Associates for the School District was reviewed by the City's Traffic Consultant and compared with previous transportation studies. The City's Traffic Engineer noted that the results of the Wenk study and previous traffic modeling studies are consistent with previous studies and expected traffic generation and traffic levels. The City study found it necessary to move the access on Johnny Cake Ridge Road a minimum of 40' north. This was done with ISD 196 revising the access to a right -out only access. Current estimates are that as adjacent vacant properties are developed, the intersection of Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147 Street will meet the warrants for a signalized intersection. Noise Study: A noise and air quality study was conducted by David Braslau, Braslau Associates, Inc. The following is a summary of the findings: • The biggest noise impact for properties to the north will occur in the afternoon when all 84 buses return to the site between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. and enter the garage through the north garage doors. • With the access on Johnny Cake revised to be an exit only, all 84 buses will need to enter the site from either the Upper 147 Street West or Evendale Way. The noise study confirms that this location will not exceed MPCA daytime noise limit requirements. • The height of the fence was also studied. A 12' fence provides the most sound attenuation, but an 8' fence is only 2 or 3 decibels less attenuation than a 12' fence. • Noise study recommendation is that either an 8' or 12' tall fence should be constructed along the north property line, air handling units should be installed on the south side of the garage, and the north doors should remain closed till a minimum of 7:00 a.m. The School District has agreed to leave the north doors closed until after 8:00 a.m. Air Quality: Mr. Innocent Eyoh, Planning Principal, Air Assessment of the MPCA found that the MPCA air emissions requirements will not be exceeded with this project. However, he recommended the following measures to ensure the best air quality on the site: • Good bus maintenance program to ensure optimum fuel economy, extended life and to control emissions. • Vehicle replacement program that replaces older buses with newer cleaner models. • Use of engine block heaters to reduce idle time. • Use of cleaner fuels. Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian connections and crosswalks are provided from the buildings to the parking areas. However, connections are needed from the buildings and site to the City's trail system along Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147 Street. See Assistant City Engineer's memo concerning specific modifications needed to Johnny Cake Ridge Road trail. Public Safety Issues: The Fire Code will require that all of the buildings have fire protection sprinkling system installed. No water lines are shown connected to the building at this time. Recreation Issues: None identified at this time. It is expected that the School District will provide cash -in -lieu of land dedication in connection with this development. 7 Signs: No sign approvals are given at this time. No signs may be installed prior to the issuance of a permit. A separate sign permit must be obtained prior to the installation of any signs on the site or the building. Public Hearing and Neighborhood Questions, Comments and Responses: See attached "Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments." 8 Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Received Two meetings have occurred with adjacent property owners since the June 17, 2015, Planning Commission meeting. The following are a compilation of comments received at the June 17 Planning Commission meeting public hearing, a July 2 meeting with neighborhood representatives, and a July 6 meeting with property owners abutting the proposed project to the north. 1. Bus facility operations: a. Observation of Operation of Other Bus Facilities: Several other bus facilities were observed and they were noisy and operated at all hours. Residents are concerned that this facility will be operated in the same way as the other bus facilities. Photos were presented of bus garages with open doors. • City Question: Can a Transportation Hub Facility be operated in a way that does not negatively impact the adjacent neighborhoods? District Answer: The coordinator of transportation has 28 years of experience operating school bus fleets, including approximately 9 years for the Eden Prairie Public Schools. Eden Prairie's transportation facility served as a model for the district's proposed transportation hub at Johnny Cake Ridge Road and 147th Street. With the coordinator's experience in school bus transportation and familiarity with the design flow at Eden Prairie, the District is confident this new facility will operate in a way that will be seen as a good neighbor. The facility is designed to make operations efficient and minimize impact to neighbors, along with the following strategies: • No fleet storage outside/ 100% indoors = more noise inside vs. outside • Safety checks and morning start -up all indoors = less noise outdoors • Block heaters and start -up inside • Site designed for continuous flow = less idling /waiting • Only 3 deep parking indoors = minimizing bus jockeying and waiting • Designed to minimize backing up = increased safety /decreased noise • Buildings arranged on site such that it shields operations from neighbors = separation of activities • Separation fence = noise transfer reduction/visual screening • Bus wash and fuel depot furthest away from residences = noise further away, screened by building and fence • Mechanic bays on south side, oriented 90° to neighbors = noise further away, screened by building and fence • Diffused route departure and arrival = less concentrated activity • City Question: How can the School District assure the neighbors that they will be good neighbors? District Answer: As a public entity operating 36 sites that are located within or adjacent to residential neighborhoods, the district has considerable experience with Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 1 of 14 being a good neighbor. The district is responsive when community complaints are received and takes appropriate action, when needed. ■ City Question: What can the District do to assure the neighborhood that they will operate differently (than the existing facilities in the Twin Cities Area)? District Answer: This facility is unique in its design and will be operated in a way that is respectful to the neighboring community. The flow of bus traffic is designed for buses to be driving forward, with minimal backing up in or around the facility. This will minimize idling time and the need for horn honking when backing up. b. Report says there will be no backup alarms on the big buses, but what about the small buses? ISD 196 response: School District indicates none of the buses will have backup alarms. c. How will the ventilation in the garage work? Will they really be able to keep the north doors closed during the morning safety check? ISD 196 response: Each bus bay will have exhaust fan systems to pull vehicle exhaust low near the source and ducted up to the roof where a ventilator discharges it into the air. The (7) ventilators will be mounted on the roof on the south side of the storage bay. These are to be sized to handle start up exhaust with the north doors closed. Cut sheets of the ventilation system are included in the staff report. b. How helpful is a telephone number? It will probably ring and never be answered. Staff response: One of the suggested conditions for the project would be that the School District establish a contact person and phone number that the neighbors could call if there are issues at the facility. The contact person would be accountable to the School District Superintendent and the School Board. The School Board is accountable to the electorate. 2. Zoning /Ordinance Issues a. Isn't the Zoning Ordinance violated (§ 155.356) if the service bay doors of the maintenance facility face Johnny Cake? Staff Response: Section 155.356 pertains to Motor Fuel Stations. This facility is not a motor fuel station so those requirements do not apply. b. CUPs exist to provide flexibility. But it's unwise and inappropriate to stretch zoning definitions, allow multiple CUPs, and variances, in order to squeeze a noisy, property value degrading facility next door to a quiet, single family residential area. Staff response: Conditional uses are those uses that the zoning ordinance permits if certain conditions are met. If the use is able to satisfy all of the conditions and able to demonstrate that any negative impacts can be mitigated, a city cannot simply deny the CUP. Once granted, the conditional use permit remains in effect as long as the use remains in compliance with the conditions. A city can revoke a CUP if conditions of the CUP are not being met. This ensures the ongoing maintenance of the use along with its conditions. c. A 12' tall fence requires a variance. Staff response: § 15 5.3 51 (E) Business, industrial and institutional district fences states that fences for industrial uses are limited to eight feet (8') in height "unless otherwise permitted by the City Council." A variance is not Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 2 of 14 required for the proposed 12' fence. An example of a tall fence is located around the Menard's storage yard which is 14' tall. d. Bus facilities are primarily located in heavy industrial areas. Staff response: Zoning requirements vary from city to city. Apple Valley approved a conditional use permit for the American Student Transportation bus garage facility at 14800 Everest Avenue in 1988 and an expansion in 1994. This property is zoned I -1 (Limited Industrial) which is the same zoning as the subject property. However, the American Student Transportation site was not immediately adjacent to a residential neighborhood. 3. Site selection: a. What was the list of properties evaluated by ISD 196 for this facility? b. The transportation hub is not a good fit at this location. There are numerous better options available. The Homeowners have provided a number of alternatives the School District should consider. c. The neighborhood wants ISD 196 to provide actual disclosure of the locations that they explored. The neighborhood wants ISD 196 to repeat its search. d. Letter from Jeff Solomon is disappointing /insufficient. He doesn't elaborate on how the site was selected. Who was the real estate guy? Staff response: While these are all questions that the neighborhood has, the Planning Commission and City Council must consider the land use application on the property that has been presented. 4. Landscape Plan: a. Landscape plans need a key to differentiate existing trees, deciduous and conifers added. Staff response: The fence location and planting plan needs more detail which would be finalized if the project were approved. Staff suggests a condition of approval would be final review and approval of the fence location and planting plan shall be approved by the Planner. 5. Noise/Noise Study: a. How do you screen the honking that is done in the morning during the pre -trip safety check? Will there be 84 horns honking every morning? Is the insulated garage door and building insulation sufficient to attenuate indoor garage noise during the morning safety check? Noise Consultant Answer: The garage doors are specified to be constructed of an inside and outside layer of 25 gage steel with 2" polystyrene between for insulation. When the doors are closed they will reduce noise levels by 28 dBA. The fence also mitigates noise emanating from the inside start -up. b. The School District isn't installing the doors to provide sound attenuation; the District said you really can't find uninsulated metal doors. Staff response: The District is proposing to install a door that will effectively help to mitigate sound on the site. c. Which provides better noise attenuation, wood or masonry wall? What is the difference? Wouldn't a masonry wall be better? Staff : A masonry wall would increase the cost of the north screening fence significantly. A wood fence with articulation will provide the most flexibility and allow the School District to design the fence to best respond to the existing plantings and the needs of the neighborhood. Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 3 of 14 d. What about noise screening for properties to the east? How will noise impact them? Staff response: The noise study did not address the residential properties to the east because the nearest home is 432' from the east edge of the property. Temporary fencing on the east side of the site may be appropriate until the vacant parcels are developed on the east side of Evendale. e. Noise study scale charts start at 40, not at zero. Information presented to Planning Commission is misleading — it's "zoomed in" to magnify noise abatement. Staff response: There was no intention on the part of the noise consultant to mislead. The initial noise study findings provided in the May 20, 2015, Planning Commission staff report starts at zero. The issue is that it's difficult to differentiate the findings at the 0 to 65 level. Starting the chart at 40 allows for easier analysis of the impact of the data. f. Noise study provides no information about existing ambient noise levels. Staff response: All of the charts showing predicted sound levels show a daytime ambient level. The graphs prepared for the June 17, 2015, Planning Commission meeting illustrate the afternoon existing ambient and the measured 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. noise levels with aircraft traffic over the neighborhood. g. Noise study talks about dBAs, but not hertz. What about hertz? Staff response: Hertz is a measurement of the number of sound vibrations in one second. The lowest A key on the piano is 27 Hz (or 27 cycles per second) while the highest key on the piano is 4,186 Hz. The MPCA noise regulations measure noise based on decibel level, which is the pressure of sound, not hertz or the pitch of sound. Noise Consultant response: Our simulation modeling used spectral data for predictions. The more detailed modeling based on the MinnNoise model uses only dBA levels. The MPCA noise standards are only in dBA and make no reference to frequency spectra. The chart below compares predicted NO FENCE levels with the measured ambient spectrum. This really does not show anything about impact that is any different than the dBA level results since the bus and ambient spectra have very similar shapes, So I don't think the spectral data will provide any additional information on potential impacts. 6. Screening Fence: a. What is the color of the fence? Staff response: This is a level of detail that will be decided upon with the final landscape plan submitted at the time of application for the building permit. A neutral color similar to the building exterior is intended. b. Can the fence be installed first, before project construction to help lessen impacts to the neighborhood during construction? Staff response: The fence cannot be installed prior to the site grading, but installing it early in the project could be considered. c. Lot 11 would not want an abrupt 12 ft. end to fence, rather a stepping down. Is this possible? Staff response: The School District is open to negotiating some of these finer points if the project moves forward. d. Increasing the height of the fence by 50% does not improve its efficacy — only 2 to 3 dBA additional noise abatement achieved. Does that mean the fence material is a poor material? Staff response: The School District indicates the height of the fence changes the level of noise attenuation and not the material. The noise consultant will discuss this in more detail. Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 4of14 e. Details regarding the fence have changed frequently. The homeowners are becoming frustrated, but the approval process is continuing. Staff response: Plans have been modified during the review and discussion of the project to address the issues raised during the public hearings. The earliest plans showed the fence in a straight line with landscaping on the south side of the wall. By constructing an articulated fence, and placing the fence a minimum of eight feet from the north property line, the District is able to break up the appearance of the fence, preserve some of the existing mature trees on the proposed hub property and place landscaping on both sides of the fence. 7. Traffic Study: a. When will traffic warrants be met for 147 and Johnny Cake signalization? There are long waits for Scottsbriar residents to enter Johnny Cake traffic already. Engineering Staff Response: The most recent traffic data for 2015 collected as part of the Traffic Impact Study indicates that a traffic signal is likely justified at the intersection based on the traffic signal warrants outlined in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MnMUTCD) meeting Warrant 2: Four Hour Volumes. This is due to growth on the roadway from the development area just west of JCRR and overall traffic growth in the area. The traffic from the Transportation Hub does not raise the level of Warrant 2 but does increase the number of hours met under Warrant 1: Eight Hour Volumes. The signal warrant analysis indicates that a signal would be an appropriate traffic control for the intersection based on current volumes but analysis with acceptable service levels indicates that the intersection can currently function without a signal. Given the current operation is adequate, it is recommended that the intersection be monitored regularly for operations until such a time that service levels require a change in intersection control. b. Clearly explain how traffic at 142 and Johnny Cake and 147 and Pilot Knob will be affected. These intersection movements away from the site also affect the neighborhood and the responses have not been as clear and deliberate. Engineering Staff Response: The attached TIS memo shows the impacts to the adjacent roadways in relation to the % change in AADT. The impacts to 142 and 144 are anticipated to be negligible. At 147 and Pilot Knob, Pilot Knob is a minor arterial divided highway and falls under the jurisdiction of Dakota County and their access spacing requirements. The access spacing for this area of Pilot Knob is 1/4 mile, but generally the County will complete an access study on a roadway to determine signal spacing (which to our knowledge has not been completed to date for this area north of County Road 42). We do not anticipate from the data that 147 will have enough 8 hour volume to meet the warrants for a signal at 147 and Pilot Knob. c. Traffic study only focused on one intersection at Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147 Street. The intersections at U. 147 and Pilot Knob Road, Johnny Cake Ridge Road and 142 Street, are also concerns. Engineering Staff Response: See response to item b. above. d. Traffic study supplied by ISD 196 does not include "shuffling" of buses within the site. While observing other facilities, noted that this occurs often. Engineering Staff Response: A Traffic Impact Study typically focuses on impacts to public roadways and not internal site circulation, however a review of the internal site circulation was conducted to determine if the circulation patterns would have any effect on the public Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 5 of 14 roadway system. The location of the filling stations and the bus wash are highly dictated by the location of the gas line through the site. This appears to result in traffic having to use upper 147 to be able to fuel and then circle around to get a wash or vice-versa. Consequently, Upper 147 street would be serving site circulation needs and the submitted site plan has been requested to be mitigated by the School District to address this potential scenario. e. Neighbor has child with autism and is concerned that this project will create backed up traffic which will lead to traffic cutting through the neighborhood. Doesn't want cut- through traffic on Everest Avenue. Engineering Staff Response: It is not anticipated that buses will utilize 144 Avenue. Buses typically are directed to utilize collector/arterial roads to the extent possible on routes to pick up areas. Should this problem occur, the school district can be contacted and informed to change the bus routes if cut-through traffic should occur. 8. Property Values a. Property value declines of $20,000 to $25,000 have been suggested by realtors to the neighbors. Examples staff gave of residential developments next to industrial areas are not the same as the proposed ISD 196 Transportation Hub. None are directly adjacent and it's not a bus facility. Staff response: The City has examples of residential properties immediately abutting a bus facility on Diamond Path. In addition, Cedar Isle Estates immediately abuts the City's Central Maintenance Facility which is used for the storage and maintenance of the City's street and utility maintenance vehicles, maintenance equipment and snow plows. The Transportation Hub facility would be required to be constructed and maintained in compliance with the City's exterior design requirements, zoning and subdivision codes and State Building Code requirements. It can be said, some buyers may recognize a value impact and others will not. A well maintained and managed bus facility should have little impact on property values. 9. Frustrated with Review Process a. Homeowners frustrated at procedure being applied to the transportation hub project. Staff response: The City is required by State Law to review and decide upon land use applications within a 120 days. The planning review process is the standard process the City engages in to review any land use application. Frustration can result from not being aware of the process or feeling like issues are not being addressed. City staff is available to answer any questions concerning the review process. b. Two public hearings were held and closed prior to receiving information on all issues regarding noise, property values and screening. Staff response: The purpose of the public hearing is to receive all of the concerns and issues from adjacent property owners and the public. It is not intended to be a debate, but a forum for receiving comments. The City staff and applicant then are charged with providing answers to the questions that have been raised. c. The Planning Commission closed the public hearing. Property values were addressed by the School District, but neighbors were denied the opportunity to counter ISD 196's claims. Staff response: As noted above, the purpose of the public hearing is to receive comments and identify issues. It is not a forum for debate. Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 6 of 14 d. The City is not providing advocacy on behalf of the neighborhood in accordance with the City's core values. Neighborhood would like the City to provide an advocate to help residents to understand the process. Staff response: The City is available to talk with residents who have questions concerning the review process. This was demonstrated by a meeting held with neighborhood representatives on July 2 and with Scottsbriar neighbors abutting the facility on July 6. The City's role is to not be an advocate for either the petitioner or the adjacent property owner, but to identify issues and ensure the issues are addressed in the process. The outcome provides informed decision making. e. The data that has been presented by the City gives the impression that the City is endorsing the project. Staff response: The City is not endorsing the project. The Planning Commission will review the request and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will make the final decision concerning the application. f. Details regarding the facility have changed frequently. The only time neighbors see changes is in the Planning Commission packets. Staff response: As the project is reviewed and discussed, elements of the project are refined to address issues. This is a typical part of the planning review process. g. Un- confirmed reports surfacing that not all of the affected (adjacent) property owners are aware of the proceedings. Neighbors would like the City to confirm that all neighbors have been notified. We have not heard from Lifeworks, but they will be affected by increased traffic. Staff response: A total of 34 public hearing notices were sent out to the property owners within 350' of the proposed property. Staff confirmed that the 11 properties adjacent to the proposed site were notified of the meeting. In addition, Lifeworks received a public hearing notice. The School District met with Lifeworks and negotiated additional landscaping on the east side of the site to help screen the transportation hub from the Lifeworks site. h. The neighborhood wants the City to not allow the School District to "force" this project through approval process. Staff response: The School District has been cooperative and open to discussing the project with concerned residents. i. The neighborhood doesn't want the City to take action on these items until all of the outstanding issues have been addressed. Staff response: The Planning Commission will not make a recommendation on a project until all of the outstanding issues have been adequately addressed. At the same time, the Commission must keep in mind the time frame for review of the project must be followed as required by State Law. Printed up hard copy of staff report. Not available until Friday. Staff response: The City's Planning calendar is set at the beginning of the year and is established to ensure timely review and consideration of land use requests. Planning Commission staff reports are completed the Friday preceding the Planning Commission meeting. Calendar deadlines are tight to ensure the City reviews and acts upon development projects within 60 and 120 days as required by State Statutes 15.99. 10. Petition a. Neighbors have discussed the proposed Transportation Hub Facility with 110 residents and received 108 signatures on a petition asking City to deny the requested project. Staff response: The petition indicates resident interest in the project which the Planning Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 7 of 14 Commission and City Council take seriously. However, the land use request must be processed in accordance with State Law and the City ordinances. b. Names have been added to the resident petition. Staff response: A copy of the petition is included in the staff report. 11. Misc. a. City established trash hauling zones to help reduce the number of large commercial vehicles in neighborhoods seven days a week. This facility would be contrary to the City's previous action. Staff response: The trash hauling zones were established to limit the number of days that trash vehicles service a neighborhood. No other service vehicles were restricted. The Assistant City Engineer addresses the issue of bus traffic on the local streets. The following questions and comments were received at the May 20, 2015, Planning Commission meeting with responses provided at the June 17, 2015, meeting: 1. Zoning — How long has the property been zoned I -1 (Limited Industrial)? What other uses are allowed in the I -1 zoning district? Might this facility be a lower impact use than other industrial uses? Response: • Earliest zoning map on file is 1968 and it showed the property zoned industrial. The property has been continuously zoned industrial since that time. • Other uses allowed in the zoning district include manufacturing, office /warehouse, truck storage within a building, animal clinics and major automobile repair and auto body repair. • The table below compares I -1 zoning provisions and the proposed transportation hub. Zoning Requirement ni rope Maximum Hei Ownership Hours of operation Minimum /Maximum Allowed went to r si( 24- hours. Not restricted. Tenant occupied and owner occupied. Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 8 of 14 Transport Hub - Proposed Develo i ment 5:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., weekdays Transportation Hub will be owned and operated by the School District which is accountable to the residents through the School Board. 2. Location of North Property line — Where is the north property line located? Response: ISD 196 staked out the north property line, the north edge of the curb, and the north building line. • Distance from Scottsbriar homes to their rear property lines: Average 101' • Distance Scottsbriar homes to proposed north parking lot curb: —121' • Distance Scottsbriar home to proposed bus garage building: —187' • A continuous 4' to 6' berm exists along the entire rear property line of the 11 Scottsbriar homes abutting the proposed property. The entire berm is on the residential properties which will help to screen the homes from the property to the south. There is extensive landscaping along the berm for all but two of the properties abutting the project. 3. Building Design and Location — • What color will the building be and are there samples of building materials? Response: The School District is working to address this question. Final colors have not been chosen, but renderings have been prepared that show a proposed earth tone color theme for the development. • Why can't the building be moved to the south side of the property? Response: The site is constrained by a pipeline easement which bisects the middle of the site. All industrial uses would have the same issue. The building is designed to minimize impacts to the neighborhood by keeping the north doors closed in the morning and all buses exiting to the south. • Windows are shown on the north side garage doors. Will neighbors be able to see lights from the buses when the drivers perform their pre -trip safety check? Response : The garage doors are shown to be 12' tall with windows located at approximately 6' high. If an 8' or 12' fence is constructed along the north property line, the lights inside the garage will not be visible to the neighbors. • The design of the building has been modified slightly by removing the clearstory window. This results in reducing the height of the garage facility from 25' to approximately 23'. The maintenance bay will remain at 25'. This height is typical of a residential neighborhood. 4. Operations — Please describe how the facility will operate. Response: Below is a description of a typical day, based on findings from the traffic study and the Transportation Coordinator's plan for the site: a. The Transportation Hub will operate primarily during the week with most buses stored during the weekend. Only special event buses would operate during the weekend or a school holiday. b. The first mechanic would arrive at 5:15 a.m. and the last mechanic would stay until 8:00 p.m. c. All buses will be stored inside the garage and plugged in overnight to reduce the need for excessive idle time to warm up the engines. d. The employees begin to arrive at approximately 5:45 a.m. with first buses leaving the site at 6:00 a.m. Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 9 of 14 e. Buses leave the site at varying times between 6:00 a.m. and 7:45 a.m. The time the bus leaves is dependent upon the time of the first pick up. The routes are designed to minimize stacking and queuing of buses leaving the site. f. Drivers have 15 minutes from check -in time to perform their pre -trip safety check and then leave site. Expected idle time is 5 to 10 minutes maximum. The ventilation system is designed to accommodate all idling and safety checks to be performed inside the garage with the north garage doors closed. g. Buses leave the site between 6:00 a.m. and 7:45 a.m. with 18 buses using the Johnny Cake Ridge Road egress and 66 using the south access. h. The District previously agreed that the north garage doors would remain closed until 8:00 a.m. Staff is proposing that in order to ensure the best sound mitigation on the site, that the north doors remain closed unless buses are entering the garage. i. Approximately 2/3 of the fleet or 56 buses would return to the site between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. j . Bus fueling and washing occurs at varying times, depending upon the schedule and when pumps are available. However, fueling usually occurs after the morning or afternoon return. k. A total of 51 buses leave the site between 2:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. for the afternoon bus routes. 1. A total of 83 buses return in the afternoon between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. with all buses entering the site from the Upper 147 Street access and Evendale access. This is the period that will have the most activity on the north side of the site when all of the buses drive into the garage through the north garage doors. m. After 5:00 p.m., only special activity buses are operated. n. The last mechanic leaves at 8:00 p.m. o. The site is closed. p. During the summer, approximately 1/3 of the fleet is operated during from 6:45 — 7:3 0 a.m. and returning by 4:00 p.m. An occasional week there may be buses that return around 4:30 p.m. 5. Noise - a. Will the buses have back up alarms. Response: The School District confirmed both the large buses and small buses will not have backup alarms. Instead, the backing will be signaled by a honk of the horn. The District states that the proposed hub facility is specifically designed to avoid the need to back up. The District states, even at the maintenance bays, there should be no need for backing. b. The maintenance facility will have air tools. How will the air tools impact the neighborhood? Response: ISD 196 says they don't plan to install air conditioning in the garage so overhead garage doors in the maintenance bay may be open during the warmer months. The noise consultant reviewed the possible impacts from air tools and found, because the maintenance bay doors are aligned east and west, the only way sound from the wrenches might reach the homes to the north would be in the case if the sound exits the east door, reflects off a bus parked in the garage, with the north and south doors open. Even then, it's Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 10 of 14 possible for only one or two of the homes to be impacted and the decibel level would only be 20 dBA, more quiet than a whisper at 30 dBA. Staff is recommending that a condition of the CUP state that maintenance bay and car wash doors must remain closed until 7:00 a.m. and after 8:00 p.m. and that air tools not be operated outside during that time. This would be more restrictive than general noise regulations for businesses. Doors could be opened during that time for vehicles to enter and exit, but would normally remain closed in the early morning and evening to help reduce any noise impacts. c. Noise study is recommending 12' fence. Residents weren't made aware of this requirement. Response: • The noise and air quality study was received just before the Planning Commission report was prepared. The report was included in the staff report but not discussed in the staff report. It is listed as an attachment to the staff report, but the staff report was very long and therefore may have been missed by the neighbors. • Findings from the noise study are that the biggest noise impact will occur in the afternoon when all 84 buses will return to the site between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. • With the access on Johnny Cake revised to be an exit only, all 84 buses will need to enter the site from either the Upper 147 Street West or Evendale Way. The noise study confirms that this location will not exceed MPCA daytime noise limit requirements. • The height of the fence was also studied. A 12' fence provides the most sound attenuation, but an 8' fence is only 2 or 3 decibels less attenuation than a 12' fence. • Noise study recommendation is that either an 8' or 12' tall fence should be constructed along the north property line, air handling units should be installed on the south side of the garage, and the north doors should remain closed till a minimum of 7:00 a.m. The School District has agreed to leave the north doors closed until after 8:00 a.m. 6. Fence along north property line - What materials? Wood? What design? a. Response: Revised drawings show that the fence is proposed to be an 8' to 12' Cross - section drawings with a shadow study have been submitted that show how the fence along the north property line will help to visually screen the Transportation Hub property. A masonry fence was evaluated, but found to be cost prohibitive and no better at noise attenuation. b. The maximum fence allowed is 8' for an industrial use, unless approved by the City Council. 7. Light — What light will be located on the north side of site? Response: A combination of pole lighting and wall packs will be installed to light the north side of the building. The nearest pole light is 23' and located about 75' south of the north property line on the northwest edge of the site. Seven wall pack lights are shown along the north side of the garage installed 16' high. The light plan shows that light levels will be at 0.0 footcandles Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 11 of 14 along most of the north property line, well below the maximum 0.5 foot candles allowed. On the northwest area of the site where the pole light is located, light levels are shown at 0.1 footcandles, still well below the requirements. The lighting will be required to be downcast shoe box fixtures that block the view of the light sources. 8. Pollution/Wind directions - a. What are prevailing wind directions? Will winds blow from south to north to Scottsbriar? Or to east to Mistwood? Response: During the school year, prevailing winds are from the northwest while in the summer, when the facility will not experience heavy use, the winds will blow from the southeast. Attached is a chart of prevailing winds in Minneapolis /St. Paul. b. MPCA Air Quality Requirements: Mr. Innocent Eyoh, Planning Principal, Air Assessment of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) found that the MPCA air emissions requirements will not be exceeded with this project. However, he recommended the following measures to ensure the best air quality on the site: Good bus maintenance program to control emissions, vehicle replacement program that replaces older buses with newer cleaner models, use of engine block heaters to reduce idle time, and use of cleaner fuels. c. During the cold weather months, buses will be plugged in to reduce idling. d. All buses have been brought up to 2004 diesel air quality standards. New air quality standards were adopted in 2007 and 2010. By 2016, only six buses will be in the fleet constructed to the 2004 standards. As buses are replaced, new buses comply with the most recent air quality requirements and are a quieter design. 9. Traffic & Traffic Study — Response: Engineering is working closely with City's Traffic Consultant to review the School District's findings as well as incorporate ISD 196's development proposal into the future plans to the adjacent public streets (JCRR and 147 The most recent updated plans received from ISD 196 included changes to the site plan including removing the right -in right -out (BIRO) to JCRR and replacing with a right-out (RO) only. This access was moved north as recommended by staff to meet site distance and functional area requirements from 147`''. Additional modification to access detail is still being requested to prevent unauthorized left turn movements or right turns into ISD 196 site from JCRR. The access off of Upper 147 Street West may need to be modified and is still under review and it will be important to ensure this would not negatively impact Uponor's north driveway as well as accommodate future plans for JCRR and 147 which could include traffic signal and additional lane capacity on JCRR. a. Traffic study doesn't account for transportation hub expansion plans. Response: The City requested that ISD 196 provide a 10 year analysis as part of Traffic Impact Report to include impacts from potential expansion of facility. Jeff Solomon, Finance Director of Finance and Operations stated that future growth in the School District is expected to occur primarily in Rosemount. While room on the site has been identified for future growth of the facility, the District does not have imminent plans for expansion. Although . not stated by Mr. Solomon, the Rosemount Bus Storage Facility will be retained which may better serve growth on the east side of ISD 196. Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 12 of 14 b. Is traffic study accurate if it does not include traffic from water park and ball fields which are busy in the summer time? Response: A typical traffic study does not evaluate event and special conditions analysis as they tend to be random and not indicative of usual weekday traffic when most mitigation is needed. It is understood that this traffic does create issues during the non- winter months in the PM peak hours. The traffic increase from the ISD 196 Transportation Hub would not be anticipated to impact the PM peak hour significantly as shown by the study. This modification results in no additional volume utilizing the access. During the summer, about 1/3 of the buses operate from approximately 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Summer hours not as early and not as late as school year. c. Moving JCRR access north makes traffic impacts worse on neighborhood. Response: The access at JCRR has been modified from a BIRO to a RO only and moved north an adequate distance to provide proper site distance and functional area from 147 and would still meet the sight distance and functional area needs at 144 There is approximately 820 feet between 147 and 144 The access was moved to approximately 350 feet north of 147 d. Study limited in scope. Response: A traffic study is limited to AM and PM peak hours during a typical weekday as that is when most traffic issues arise and may need to be mitigated. Evaluation of other adjacent streets with the traffic increase from this specific development would not be anticipated to change the current service levels at other intersections nearby due to the traffic dispersion to the roadway network. e. When ISD 196 Transportation Hub traffic is off -peak, actually ends up extending peak traffic period from one hour to two hours. Response: The peaking characteristics of traffic in an area are generally not due to one development. The traffic analysis provided does not indicate an extension of peak hours more than currently understood to be in the area. f. Traffic study needs to account for Uponor expansion. Response: It is important to the City that Uponor operations are not impacted by District 196 operations. Uponor will run two 12 hour factory shifts each day, 7 days a week changing over at 6:00 am and 6:00 pm and should be included in the overall study for JCRR and 147 Existing volumes from Uponor have been included in study. Uponor also has access off Everest. g. Europa may act as a cut through street. Response: Public streets are available for all public traffic to use. It is generally understood that buses will follow routes and use the collector and arterial roadways to travel. It is not anticipated that this would cause additional traffic growth of Europa. It is also understood that employees may use any street they wish, but would likely access the development from 147 off JCRR or Pilot Knob Road. h. Drivers turning right (east) on 144 Street from northbound Johnny Cake Ridge Road don't have a right turn lane which is a concern. Response: When the city reviews long term improvements to the entire JCRR corridor, additional turn lane requirements will be reviewed at all intersections including 144 b. Property Values — This facility will reduce my property value. Response: Property values are determined by a complex set of variables that are difficult to attribute to a single adjacent land use. Instead, property values are impacted by overall City development patterns. Residential properties adjacent to other industrially zoned properties in the City have not experienced a decline in property values. The Transportation Hub facility would be required to be constructed and maintained in compliance with the City's exterior design requirements, zoning and subdivision codes Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 13 of 14 and State Building Code requirements. It can be said, some buyers may recognize a value impact and others will not. A well maintained and managed bus facility should have little impact on property values. 10. Site Choice — Why was this parcel selected when other properties are vacant with same zoning but not adjacent to residential? Response: Jeff Solomon, Director of Finance and Operations provided a letter that explained the District's property search process. Fourteen parcels were examined in Apple Valley and Eagan. The criteria for the property included appropriate zoning, adequate size, availability for purchase, functionality for operations, site cost, development costs, and proximity for providing the needed service now and into the foreseeable future. Based on this analysis, the Eagle Ridge parcel was found to best meet ISD 196's needs. This District is responding to this question and stated they will provide the City with a spreadsheet that explains their analysis. Public Hearing and Neighborhood Meeting Comments Page 14 of 14 aruhitects engineers vomw.woldae.com $05 Saint Peter Street I n Paul: M. NI 55102 e 651 227 7773 fax 651 223 5640 M Minnesota Illinois Michigan Colorado Iowa To: Kathy Bodrner, City of Apple Valley From: Randy Dukek, ISD 196 1 Scott McQueen, Wold Date: July 6, 2015 Comm. No 152010 Subject: Independent School District #196 Transportation Hub Inquiries memorandum City Question: Can a Transportation Hub Facility be operated in a way that does not negatively impact the adjacent neighborhoods? District Answer: The coordinator of transportation has 28 years of experience operating school bus fleets, including approximately 9 years for the Eden Prairie Public Schools, Eden Prairie's transportation facility served as a model for the district's proposed transportation hub at Johnny Cake Ridge Road and 147th Street. With the coordinator's experience in school bus transportation and familiarity with the design flow at Eden Prairie, the District is confident this new facility will operate in a way that will be seen as a good neighbor. The facility is designed to make operations efficient and minimize impact to neighbors, along with the following strategies: • No fleet storage outside/100% indoors = more noise inside vs. outside • Safety checks and morning start-up all indoors = less noise outdoors • Block heaters and start-up inside • Site designed for continuous flow= less idling/waiting • Only 3 deep parking indoors = minimizing bus jockeying and waiting • Designed to minimize backing up= increased safety/decreased noise • Buildings arranged on site such that it shields operations from neighbors = separation of activities • Separation fence = noise transfer reduction/visual screening • Bus wash and fuel depot furthest away from residences = noise further away, screened by building and fence • Mechanic bays on south side, oriented 90° to neighbors = noise further away, screened by building and fence • Diffused route departure and arrival = less concentrated activity City Question: Now can the School District assure the neighbors that they will be good neighbors? District Answer: As a public entity operating 36 sites that are located within or adjacent to residential neighborhoods, the district is very conditioned to be a good neighbor, The district is responsive when community complaints are received and takes appropriate action, when needed. City Question: What can the District do to assure the neighborhood that they will operate differently (than the existing facilities 117 the Twin Cities Area)? District Answer: This facility is unique in its design and will be operated in a way that is respectful to the neighboring community. The flow of bus traffic is designed for buses to be driving forward, with minimal backing up in or around the facility. This will minimize idling time and the need for horn honking when backing up, City Question: Now many buses will have back-up alarms? Will all 35 of the small buses? District Answer: None of the buses will have back-up alarms. City Question: Now will ventilation be handled in the garage? Will the District really be able to start the buses with the north doors closes? Consultant Answer: Each bus bay will have exhaust fan systems to pull vehicle exhaust low near the source and ducted up to the roof where a ventilator discharges it into the air. The (7) ventilators will be mounted on the roof on the south side of the storage bay, These are to be sized to handle start up exhaust with the north doors closed, designers and researchers for public environments architects engineers www.woldae.com Minnesota Illinois Michigan Colorado Iowa Memorandum to Kathy Bodmer, City of Apple Valley Page Two City Question: Will the garage doors really block the noise? Consultant Answer: The garage doors are specified to be insulated. According to the District's consultant David Braslau, when closed they will likely reduce noise levels by 28 dBA. The fence also mitigates noise emanating from the inside start-up. City Question: Noise study discusses, dBA's but not hertz. What about Hertz? Do MPCA noise regulations address Hertz? Consultant Answer: Our simulation modeling used spectral data for predictions. The more detailed modeling based on the MinnNoise model uses only dBA levels. The MPCA noise standards are only in dBA and make no reference to frequency spectra. The chart below compares predicted NO FENCE levels with the measured ambient spectrum. This really does not show anything about impact that is any different than the dBA level results since the bus and ambient spectra have very similar shapes, So I don't think the spectral data will provide any additional information on potential impacts. Mop di we ow • La vow) knew.. • SS/ISD_196/152010/crsp/jun15 designers and researchers for public environments david brasieu associates, incorporated Noise Study Questions 6603 Queen Ave So. • Suite N Richfield, MN 55423 telephone: 612-331-4571 fax: 612-331-4572 RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON APPLE VALLEY HUB FROM JULY 8, 2015 10 July 2015 a. Which provides better noise attenuation, wood or masonry wall? What is the difference? \Woubiu"1u masonry p/oU bcbetter? A solid wood fence with 3/4" thickness will provide more than enough attenuation to reduce sound through the fence. For structural stability and other factors, noise barriers in Minnesota are usually constructed with 1-1/2" wood panels which are being proposed here. The height of the fence determines the effectiveness of the fence, not the material of the waU itself, since sound waves will "leak" over the top ofthe wall (seethe simplified sketch below). While a masonry wall can attenuate more sound energy through the wall itself, it will be no better than a wood fence for stopping sound from traveling over the top of the wall. b. What about noise screening for properties to the east? How will noise impact them? [Can David estimate noise to the east?] The doset home to the east is about 700 feet from the nearest bus path along the east side of the garage, while the homes to the north are about 150 feet from the nearest bus path. Therefore, the maximum expected level at the homes east will be about 14 dBA lower than at the homes to the north assuming no barrier. The maximum expected level at the hones east of the hub is about 42 dBA which was the previously monitored ambient sound level. Fence Effectiveness Question c. Increasing the height ofthe fence by 50% does not improve its efficacy — only 2 to 3 dB/\ additional noise abatement achieved. Does that mean the fence material is a poor material? The effectiveness ofthe waH is not determined by the waH material but by the height ofthe wall, assuming that the wall material is heavy enough (such as 3/4" plywood) to stop noise from going through the wall itself. The sound level for a very long wall, with the bus spectrum, wiU drop about 2 dBA for each 4 feet increase in the wall hei ht up to about 16 feet after which the benefit decreases with height. 0 = = internet | The intent of this ietter is to provide feedback regarding Fencing details, if the proposal to Fencing receives recommendation from the Planning Commfttee, and official approval for development from the City Council. **Thiskette DOES NOT IMPLY "Res' nated Consent"** In fact, this letter is quite the opposite. There continues o be un-resolvable issues related to the proposed facility.. 1) (NOISE) By the Petitioners own data, the fencing material (wood) has been shown to be inadequate in blocking Noise from normal operations of the proposed facility. a. For aU heights, the amount of noise attenuated is LESS THAN the amoun of noise newty-imposed upon the residents. b. Increasing the height of the fence (by S0%) (8' to 12') does not provide additional noise attenuation. This clearly demonstrates that the material is "max'd out", and is no Ionger providing buffering from noise. c. The Petitioner claims other materials are identical in attenuation abilities. However, data for other materials was never made available for review (or available as alternative). 2) (NOISE) the Petitioner's own noise data is completely inadequate... a. It 15 based upon calculated (not actual) values of a bus engine. b. It does not account for Back-Up Beeping c. it does not account for Honking during Entries/Exits. d. It does not account for Honking durng required/DaUy safety checks. 3) (NOISE) The Petitioner has not provided even the most basic Reasonable accounting of variations from their proposed usae of the facuity (introduced by normal daUy operation). These variations will further impose noisy conditions upon the homeowners. a. North doors to remain closed. Yet, it is obvious that doors will be opened to allow wind to evacuate nauseous Exhaust and Heat generated by 85 busses trapped inside an enclosed space. b. South doors only used for exiting faciflty. Yet, if the First or Second bus fails to start, the North door will need to be opened. There is NOTH1NG in writing that can be used to enforce the promise that busses will exit to the south. 4) (VISUAL) By the Petitioner's own data, the fencing height option of 8' provides no visual screening from the busses (the district stated that busses are 11'6" tall). 5) (VISUAL) By the Petitioner's own data, the fencing height option of 12' provides ba ely provides adequate visual screening from the busses. The tops of the busses (fog strobes and emergency exits) were not accounted for in their proposal, and impose additional height to each bus. Even with a 12' fence, only 6 inches remains for marginof-error Resident Correspondence July 10, 201e 1 of 5 O> (VISUAL The petitioner's usage of 6-8" tall trees to al eviate unaesthetic qualities of the fence falls short. The fence is nearly twice as tall. Homeowners find living next to "The Great Walt of Apple VaUey" to be distasteful. 7) (VISUAL) Few other 12' fences (possibly none) have been imposed upon other residents of Apple Valley. The only two examples found are the backsEde of the Menard's building (Lumber Yard), and the housing located across Cedar Ave from Cub Foods. That being said, this letter is to provide input to the City if such a Noisy facility were to be situated next to myself. Withou rovidin "resi nated the only option s to require all of the following Screening requirements.., 1) Fence that is 12' tall and fully-opaque (having no gaps that allow visibility on the other side). 2) Located as far away from the property line as possible without regarding to curb/buildings Iocated behind the facility. This is to aUow for fuII-canopy development of alt trees. 3) Composed of a material that reduces MORE noise than is allowed to escape. 4) Hidden from view by providing no less than eight additional trees (per homeowner). These trees shall be placed on the North side of the fence, and primarily-situated on the Petitioner's land. If space does not permit for reasonable growth of all eight trees, the extra trees are made available for the homeowner to pface upon their tand. For example: if only 5 trees fit on petitioner's land, then 3 trees shall be donated to the homeowner. For such "donated trees", all costs at the initial time of planting (and for a warranty period of 2 years after initial planting if replacements are required) shall be assumed by the district. 5) All current and future costs associated with trees/sod located on the Petitioner's land shall be solely paid-for and incurred by the Petitioner. 6) Choice of species for all trees shall be left to the homeowner's sole discretion prior to any current/future plantings. Cost shaI not be a timiting factor in the choice of trees selected. Homeowners reserve the right to select any combination of species. Homeowners reserve the right to change species at any future dates should a tree fail to thrive (see Dead/Dying). 7) Require that all permanent vegetation be maintained, and kept in present working order. a. Dead/dying trees located on the Petitioner's land shall be immediately-replaced without regard to cost at the request of the Homeowner's. Determination that a tree is dead/dying shall be supplied by the homeowner (and based upon expertise of any persons employed by a landscaping business, or a qualified arborist, or by obvious observation). The Request must be supplied by the homeowner in either writing or email to the current Transportation Hub Director, who must personally oversee the dead/dying tre&s replacement. b. Grass (sod) must be mowed at a minimum of once per week. 8) Written/Signed documentation effectuating all rights/requirements must be given to each homeowner prior to any development or planting. All homeowner rights are transferrable in the event of any transfer of title. Mike Erdmann 5936 144 StVV(Lot 4) Resident Correspondence July 10, 2015 2 of 5 Bodmer. Kath To: Subject: From: Nordquist, Bruce Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 9:45 AM To: Kirk Futhey Cc: Bodmer, Kathy Subject: RE: Transportatton Hub Fence Maggie and Kirk, Thanks for the feedback. The process will continue and we're better informed with your feedback. Maggie, thanks for being a thoughtful leader for your neighbors. It is my understanding that the District is preparing the requested list of properties that were considered during their search. So, it's not just process, also progress. We haven't seen anything yet on the list, but hope to see something next week. Bruce From: On Behalf Of Kirk Futhey Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 7:48 AM To: Bodmer, Kathy; Nordquist, Bruce Subject: Transportation Hub Fence Kathy & Bruce: Thank you so much for taking the time to meet with the neighborhood on Monday July 6th, it is greatly appreciated. Thank you, Maggie Futhey Nordquist, Bruce RE: Transportation Hub Fence My husband, Kirk and I would prefer a 12 foot fence, if the only options are 8 or 12 feet. As far as planting of trees, we would definitely like them, just now sure of the specifics at this time Resident Correspondence July 10, 2015 3 of 5 To: Subject: -Original Message-- From: Nordquist, Bruce Sent: Friday, July 10, 20 To: Nick Sawka Cc: Bodmer, Kathy Subject: RE: Bus facility Mr. Nordquist, Nick and Carol Sawka Nordquist, Bruce RE: Bus facility Nick and Carot, Got your message. Thanks for the direct feedback. I can understand how you might conclude that the result is a foregone conclusion. I might add though that the process we are required to follow takes weeks of issue dentification and information exchange and might appear to only have one conclusion. The findirigs of fact developed by staff during the process are the basis for a decision and, when shared, becomes the responsibility of the Planning Commission to evaluate and make a recommendation to the City Council for their consideration. Being responsible for this process, 1 wanted to mention that state statute is clear that if we fail to act as described above and within a specified timeline, only then, is there one conclusion rendered. Only then is the District application automatically approved to their benefit. Vour input on the fence helps us, and the Planning Commission, make a more informed decision. Thanks for your clear message. Bruce Nordquist Community Development Director City of Apple Valley --Original Message-- From: Nick Sawka [mailto: Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 10:05 AM To: Nordquist, Bruce Cc: Carol Sawka Subject: Bus facility My name is Nick Sawka, my wife is Carol and we live at 5910 144th St W. As you know, we are concerned about the proposed ISD 196 bus facility proposed for our backyard. We feel that our concerns are all minimized and the result is a foregone conclusion. We do appreciate the opportunity to meet with the school district concerning the p fence. We both would want a 12 foot fence articulated or not but with evergreen plantings inside, as well as out and staggered so that there are no gaps. Thank you for this opportunity to voice our suggestions. Resident Correspondence July 10, 2015 4 of 5 Bodm To: Subject: From: Nordquist, Bruce Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 1:06 PM To: Misty Scholler Cc: Bodmer, Kathy Subject: RE: District 196 Bus Shed Hi Misty, Thanks for your feedback. Neighbors are encouraging the 12 ft. approach. I've heard from three neighbors this morning, and two additional and specific discussions at last Monday's meeting, in support of 12 ft. I also wanted you to know the feedback is not like an All-Star game and fans voting to add the Twins second baseman today carries the day. We are advising the Planning Commission that the information heard includes some interest in the 8 ft. fence as well. Actually, they are receiving a copy of your message. All have agreed that the right landscaping would really help and the District has been supportive. Given your comments Monday night, you can appreciate that the District has said they will give us more detailed information on their site search. While we haven't seen it yet, this has been sought and now there will be a response. Happy Friday to you as well. And, enjoy what I hear will be a very warm weekend. Bruce From: Misty Scholler [mailto: Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 11:04 AM To: Nordquist, Bruce Subject: District 196 Bus Shed Hi Bruce — Happy Friday!! I really appreciate you and Kathy (and Mayor Mary & Clint) taking the time to meet with us. I think opening up the lines of communication in that manner was huge so 1 greatly appreciate your time and efforts. The Scholler's would prefer an 8 ft. fence if need be, however we would also like LOTS and LOTS of trees to help this project be more appealing to the eye as we enjoy our time in the back yard. Preferably evergreen or something that does not lose it's leaves in the winter months. Thanks again Bruce — 1 look forward to hearing of any progress on this subject. Have a fantastic weekend!! Misty J. Scholler vic,e Presdent 1 Belt Bank & TruE 5500 Wayzata Bh:id l'AN1 55416 Ka h Top COMMUNITY Nordquist, Bruce RE: District 196 Bus Shed "-tor to (i)1 Bost Freo Chrxkinpf Plernber FD ti's ort - 1 , ,.. , :vitter 1 Resident Correspondence July 10, 2015 5 of 5 S3JON , • fetus 001 Issues with screening in front. SOLD Too small. SOLD Not within district and too small. Not within district. Too small. 1 Development challenges. SOLD Entire site under contract. Tight fit. Significant environmental issues from construction debris. No Phase I or II and Hanson wants buyer to help with Parking 29 spaces 32 spaces +1- 62 spaces (expandable) 112 spaces 162+ spaces V/NI V/NI aaiid 000`000`Z$ 000`0I S$ 000'56E' I $ for lease 000`0EL:Z$ Sold for $5.8 million $4,138,200 or $4.75 psf 4.-■ CID 4 11) EA EA3- jua71( 12IHD Not Listed SJllI S.131110 Paramount Colliers Liberty Property Northmarq Current teplsnpui Industrial Ud BP — Business Park Z 1--- 1 Building/Land 31,000 SF building/3.2 acres sone zI/BuTunq AS 000`9E S °JOU E• z 18,010 SF building 39,242 SF building 54,612 SF/ 3.55 acres (adjacent 2.6 acres available) 88,167 SF/7.88 acres 21.58 acres 8.36 acres u uuReg ct ,...... t/IJ ct u Eagan Eagan Eagan 'IPA aiddy „ Ca. fa. al Address 3150 Mike Collins Drive 15 Yankee Doodle Road NE corner of Lexington Avenue and Lexington Point Parkway 1771 Yankee Doodle Road 2845 West Service Road 3107 Sibley Memorial Highway 3255 Neil Armstrong Boulevard Flagstaff and 147 Street West 6055 150 Street West (SW corner of 147 Street and Johnny Cake Ridge Road) 41t1UN Machine Tool Supply Stock Building Supply puWT 1 Imperial Developers Sibley Industrial Center L Taystee Bakery/Metz L I, L Land/North of Menards/HBP Pro p erty "Hanson" Land/HBP Property z E E 0 Summary of Sites/Buildings Considered EK/ISD_196/152010/rpts/SitesConsideredMatrix clean-up costs. Site optioned by district. Will not divide, guided big box retail and expensive. 00I Guided residential/retail and pending sale. Too small and guided retail. V/N V/N V/N JS/00'S L S1E - LS Flyer did not list .rice. dS/OCL II I dS/L E*8$ SJOIHOD Menards Cerron Northmarq Wakota - I Zoned Ag - Guided Industrial Office Warehouse 7CW 12.76-15.4 acres 50.56 acres 3.54 acres 10-20.24 acres ( 8 c.Z) same Lt. IC aiddv a) t C,... v.... Q. ct - t t aiddv giddy XallUA oiddy• Johnny Cake Ridge Road 6055 150 Street West CR 42/150 Street/Johnny Cake Ridge Road 1S3j■A 1- T OC LS NW corner of 147 Street/Flagstaff Avenue SE corner of CR 42 and Foliage Avenue Land/Eagle Ridge Business Park Land/Menards Inc. piferi Land/Fischer Market Place Land/Hillcrest Acres 5th Addition Note: Land search conducted by Ted Carlson, Carlson Commercial EK/ISD_196/152010/rpts/SitesConsideredMatrix Comm No: 152010 LTNJ & NJ < , INCA Consulting Engineers & Surveyors 12224 NicolletAvenue •Burnsville, MN 55337 Phone (952) 890 -0509 • Fax (952) 890 -8065 www.bolton- menk.com Date: July 10, 2015 To: City of Apple Valley, MN From: Bryan T. Nemeth, P.E., PTOE Michael Boex, P.E. Subject: Traffic Impact Study Review - Updated ISD 196 Transportation Hub Bryan T. N;meth, P.E., PTOE Introduction Forecasts MEMORANDUM I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 43354 July 10, 2015 Reg. No. Date The Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for the ISD 196 Transportation Hub dated May 8, 2015 and an updated site plan dated June 9, 2015 was reviewed to determine if and how the development impacts the traveling public. Overall, the TIS appears to be accurate and shows few transportation concerns on an operational basis. There are some safety and congestion concerns that are not fully outlined in the study. Recommendations to the site access and future considerations for traffic control changes are provided below. The TIS forecasts appear to be accurate based on local knowledge of the bus operations in the community. There are approximately 200 buses currently using the bus facility in Rosemount. Effectively half the buses would move to the Transportation Hub, approximately 100 buses. Based on the forecasts provided in the report, a total of 83 buses would exit the site in the AM peak hours. This leaves approximately 17 buses on site. It is understood that the actual bus levels will vary based on student enrollment and bus routes within the district. The bus projections appear to be accurate. Based on the above, overall daily traffic into and out of the site is estimated to be approximately 850 trips. This is based on a total of 10 trips per day per bus to account for both part time and full time bus drivers getting to and from the site, the bus trips, deliveries, and administration and maintenance staff on site throughout the day. H: \APVA\N15103965 \General Projects\2015\ISD 196 Transportation Hub\ISD 196 Transportation Hub TIS Review - Updated 071015.docx DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer Roadwa Y Segment Existing g AADT AADT Increase from Trans. Hub pro posed p AADT % Change in AADT Daily Roadway Capacity* Max Volume to Capacity Ratio JCRR th (N of 147th) 7,900 60 7,960 0.8% 18,000 to 22,000 0.44 JCRR th (S of 147 6,500 220 6,720 3.4% 18,000 to 22,000 0.37 Upper 147th (E of JCRR) 3,000 250 3,250 8.3% 15,000 to 18,000 0.22 Upper 147th (E of Evendale) 3,000 480 3,480 16.0% 15,000 to 18 000 0.23 Page 2 While current traffic levels indicate few issues, there may be concerns when looking at a longer timeframe. A traffic analysis out ten years from initial opening should be conducted to understand the future implications of the site to the public roadway system. This includes both a no -build and build scenario to understand the Transportation Hub impacts. Background traffic growth should also be included. Operations The adjacent intersections are anticipated to be able to handle the additional influx of projected traffic from the Transportation Hub as indicated in the ISD 196 Study provided, but the actual impact is anticipated to be worse than currently shown in the ISD 196 Study provided. The number of buses leaving the site at the same time may impact the intersection of Upper 147t Street /Johnny Cake Ridge Road (JCRR) and should be kept to a minimum. Additionally, the buses will increase the heavy vehicle percentage as buses accelerate and decelerate slower than passenger vehicles, and the resultant backups could be higher due to the longer vehicle length. While this does impact operations and backups, it is not anticipated to affect the overall results but should be included to accurately account for them. Through discussions with the District, the buses will leave the site in four minute increments. This spacing of buses should eliminate any anticipated bus queuing issues for the westbound approach to the Upper 147t Street/Johnny Cake Ridge Road (JCRR) intersection. Though not anticipated, if bus queueing becomes an issue and impacts backups that reach the intersection of Evendale Way, mitigation would need to be provided to remove the backups. This includes revisiting the bus exiting procedure. Public Roadway System Impacts Due to the impacts the site has on Upper 147t Street and Evendale Way, the intersection should be evaluated in the traffic study for at least the 10 year planning horizon impact, especially as traffic increases in the area. It is anticipated that the traffic would be effectively dispersed throughout the public roadway system. The traffic increase from the Transportation Hub (850 trips per day) to other roadways and intersections is anticipated to be minimal compared to the overall background traffic increase based on the following. H:\APVA\N15103965\General Projects\2015\ISD 196 Transportation Hub\ISD 196 Transportation Hub TIS Review - Updated 071015.docx DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer. 147th (W of JCRR) 4,700 95 4,795 2.0% 15,000 to 18 000 0.32 Pilot Knob Rd 18,400 480 18,800 2.6% 28,000 to 34,000 0.67 144 210 0 210 0% 1,000 0.21 142nd 2,050 0 2,050 0% 3,500 to 4,800 0.59 Page 3 *Daily Roadway Capacity Range based on the Highway Capacity Manual procedures for the lanes, area type, surrounding land uses and access, and type of roadway Generally, a volume to capacity (V /C) ratio should be less than 1.00 with a goal of 0.85 to allow for increases during special events and other special conditions. It is noted that the Transportation Hub peak times do not coincide with Aquatic Center Event peak times. All of the roadway segments nearby the site have V/C ratios less than 0.85 and the change in traffic volume is less than 5% except on 147t Street in front of the site. Upper 147 Street Access In relation to the operations analysis, southbound left turns out of the site should be directed to use Evendale Way and if safety issues occur, the driveway access to Upper 147t Street, east of JCRR should be converted to a restricted movement intersection, either a RIRO or 3 /a. access intersection (right -in, right -out, and left -in movements allowed). A right turn lane from Upper 147t Street to the driveway may be required at a future date and will be monitored and included within the Development Agreement with ISD 196. Johnny Cake Ridge Road Access The access onto JCRR was first proposed as a right -in /right -out access but has subsequently been revised as a right -out access only. The following outlines the reasoning for adjusting the access location and movements. As shown in the original site plan, the RIRO was approximately 225 feet from Upper 147t Street. The revised right -out movement is approximately 315 feet from Upper 147t Street. Two measures were reviewed to determine if the location is acceptable. These include the Functional Intersection Area of the right turn in and the Intersection Sight Distance of the right out. • Functional Area Based on the travel speed and accounting for one bus within the right turn lane, the functional area for the right turn is calculated to be 275 feet. This distance should also include provisions for stopping sight distance. Since the adjacent intersection is an all -way stop the distance can be reduced, but the intersection may not always remain an all -way stop and the intersection spacing needs should accommodate a future change in traffic control. This functional area calculation can also be applied to 144t Street. Since there is no traffic control to stop traffic on JCRR at 144t the functional area calculation considers the right turn at 144t plus the stopping sight distance (SSD) at 45 mph from 147t or SSD at 30 mph from the access since a vehicle cannot accelerate fast enough to get to 45 mph at exiting. This results in an optimal functional area distance of 415 feet between 144t and the access. H: \APVA\N15103965 \General Projects\2015 \ISD 196 Transportation Hub\ISD 196 Transportation Hub TIS Review- Updated 071015.docx DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer. Page 4 • Intersection Sight Distance The Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) for a vehicle coming out of the access is 375 feet, indicating that the access should be located to provide adequate ISD from the intersection of Upper 147t Street. This same intersection sight distance is also applied at 144t Street. The location of the driveway access is impacted by the site buildings, 144t Street, 147t Street, and the proximity of the residential properties north of the site. Taking into account the above calculations and the spacing between 144t and 147t of 900 feet, the right out access should be located 415 feet from 144t and 375 feet from 147t not taking into consideration the all -way stop at 147t With the all -way stop, the access could be closer to 147t The driveway access should be moved as appropriate to balance the sight distances and neighborhood concerns. While the intentions of the updated site plan with the right -out is understood, there is no median and the right -out geometric features may not prevent a vehicle from exiting out and taking a left. While buses would likely follow the intention and signage, other vehicles may not, especially if there is little incentive to do so. The right -out should be modified to more effectively point vehicles to the right /north. If safety issues occur, a median may need to be constructed along the access to prevent the illegal maneuvers. 147th Street /JCRR Traffic Control Options The traffic study does not include any analysis including a traffic signal or roundabout at the intersection of Upper 147t Street and Johnny Cake Ridge Road. The timing for a change in traffic control and geometry is based off of the traffic need primarily due to the timing of adjacent development and the safety and operational need. The most recent traffic data for 2015 collected as part of the Traffic Impact Study indicates that a traffic signal is likely justified at the intersection based on the traffic signal warrants outlined in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MnMUTCD) meeting Warrant 2: Four Hour Volumes. This is due to the growth on the roadway from the development area just west of JCRR and overall traffic growth in the area. The traffic from the Transportation Hub does not raise the level of Warrant 2 but does increase the number of hours met under Warrant 1: Eight Hour Volumes. The Warrant Analysis is attached. The signal warrant analysis indicates that a signal or roundabout would be an appropriate traffic control for the intersection based on current volumes but analysis with acceptable service levels indicates that the intersection can currently function effectively without a signal or roundabout. Due to the warrant analysis results, the traffic analysis should be updated to include a signal and roundabout option and the potential implications, especially to the westbound movements and stacking. It is recommended that the intersection be monitored regularly for operations until such a time service levels require a change in intersection control. Internal Site Circulation Review of the internal site circulation was conducted to determine if the circulation patterns would have any effect on the public roadway system. The location of the filling stations and the bus wash are highly dictated by the location of the gas line through the site. This appears to result in traffic having to use Upper 147t Street to be able to fuel and then circle around to get a wash, or vice - versa. Consequently, Upper 147t Street would be serving site circulation needs and should be mitigated. One alternative to mitigate this would be to provide a site drive east of the staff parking lot, connecting H:\APVA\N15103965\General Projects\2015\ISD 196 Transportation Hub\ISD 196 Transportation Hub TIS Review - Updated 071015.docx DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer. Page 5 through the unused area between the staff lot and the fuel depot/bus wash area. The drive would run north - south, east of the staff lot, and then east -west to the south side of the fuel depot. The distance that the bus wash and fuel depot are located from Upper 147t Street may be concern if stacking of buses for the fuel depot and /or bus wash impacts the public roadway system. Mitigation to prevent this should occur if it becomes a concern. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the recent traffic data included in the study, the intersection of Johnny Cake Ridge Road at upper 147t Street meets the justification for a signal or roundabout. Given current operations are acceptable based on service levels, it is recommended the operation of the intersection be monitored until such a time that a change in intersection control is appropriate. The following traffic study updates and access modifications are recommended based on the review: • Add a 10 -year after opening analysis to accommodate any potential site expansion. • Include the intersection of Upper 147t Street and Evendale Way in the 10 year analysis. • Since the intersection of JCRR/147t St currently meets justification for a signal, evaluate the intersection as a signal and as a roundabout in the 10 year analysis, along with the all -way stop. • Move the right -out access onto Johnny Cake Ridge Road as appropriate and revise the geometry to point vehicles more appropriately north upon exiting. • If safety issues arise, access restrictions and/or medians may need to be provided at the site access driveways to Upper 147t Street and Johnny Cake Ridge Road. H: \APVA\N15103965 \General Projects\2015 \ISD 196 Transportation Hub\ISD 196 Transportation Hub TIS Review - Updated 071015.docx DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer. HOUR MAJOR APP. 1 MAJOR APP. 3 TOTAL 1+3 MAJOR 1A/1B MINOR APP. 2 MINOR 2 1A/1B MINOR APP. 4 MINOR 4 1A/1B MET SAME 1A/1B 0:00 - 1:00 10 7 18 / 14 / 7 / / 1:00 - 2:00 1 5 6 / 4 / 2 / 1 2:00 - 3:00 4 4 7 / 1 / 2 / / 3:00 - 4:00 3 3 6 / 0 / 5 / / 4:00 - 5:00 17 7 24 / 4 / 11 / / 5:00 - 6:00 71 55 126 / 8 / 35 / / 6:00 - 7:00 114 175 289 / 39 / 79 /X / 7:00 - 8:00 348 386 734 X/X 122 /X 139 /X /X 8:00 - 9:00 192 171 363 / 73 /X 114 /X / 9:00 - 10:00 143 149 292 / 60 / 105 /X / 10:00 - 11:00 102 104 206 / 84 /X 87 /X / 11:00 - 12:00 143 161 304 / 98 /X 121 /X / 12:00 - 13:00 228 148 376 / 172 X/X 78 /X / 13:00 - 14:00 201 132 333 / 177 X/X 83 /X / 14:00 - 15:00 299 204 503 X/ 193 X/X 99 /X X/ 15:00 - 16:00 384 298 682 X/X 212 X/X 136 /X X/X 16:00 - 17:00 499 351 850 X/X 217 X/X 101 /X X/X 17:00 - 18:00 595 367 962 X/X 214 X/X 133 /X X/X 18:00 - 19:00 399 295 694 X/X 177 X/X 91 /X X/X 19:00 - 20:00 279 206 485 X/ 139 /X 55 / / 20:00 - 21:00 193 168 360 / 83 /X 47 / / 21:00 - 22:00 54 67 121 / 37 / 10 / / 22:00 - 23:00 34 36 69 / 31 / 7 / / 23:00 - 24:00 17 20 37 / 15 / 6 / / LOCATION: COUNTY: REF. POINT: DATE: OPERATOR: Warrant 1A Warrant 1B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Warrant 7 Apple Valley Apple Valley Dakota 6/8/2015 BTN 0.70 FACTOR USED? POPULATION < 10,000? EXISTING SIGNAL ? THRESHOLDS 1A/1B: et r 5 5 5 4 2 1 9 8 YES No Nip] I No equirea r 8 8 SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS 2015 Existing: Estimated Daily based off of 6 hours data Speed Approach Description 45 45 30 30 Major App1: Major App3: Minor App2: Minor App4: 420/630 Lanes Johnny Cake Ridge Road Johnny Cake Ridge Road 147th Street 147th Street 2 2 3 3 Not satisfied Not satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied, check accident record 140/70 LOCATION: Apple Valley COUNTY: Dakota REF. POINT: Speed Approach Description Lanes DATE: 6/8/2015 45 Major App1: Johnny Cake Ridge Road 2 45 Major App3: Johnny Cake Ridge Road 2 OPERATOR: BTN 30 Minor App2: 147th Street 3 30 Minor App4: 147th Street 3 0.70 FACTOR USED? YES POPULATION < 10,000? No EXISTING SIGNAL ? No 700 s 600 U co 2 500 o. o. < 400 E 300 o i > 200 100 Warrant 2, Four -hour Volumes — — Warrant 3, Peak -hour Volumes • Actual Hourly Count 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - VPH Figure 1. Four Hour and Peak Hour Warrant Analysis Note: For data points outside the graph range, check the minor street volume against the lower thresholds Warrant Criteria Actual Hourly Count Major Warrant 2, F Warrant 3, Pe Major Actual Hourly Count 200 420 18 14 300 350 500 6 4 400 285 435 7 2 500 230 370 6 5 600 175 315 24 11 700 135 260 126 35 800 103 215 289 79 900 80 175 734 139 1000 80 140 363 114 1100 80 115 292 105 1200 80 100 206 87 1300 80 100 304 121 1400 80 100 376 172 1500 80 100 333 177 1600 80 100 503 193 1700 80 100 682 212 1800 80 100 850 217 962 214 694 177 485 139 360 83 121 37 69 31 37 15 1800 HOUR MAJOR APP. 1 MAJOR APP. 3 TOTAL 1+3 MAJOR 1A/1B MINOR MINOR 2 1A/1B MINOR APP. 4 MINOR 4 1A/1B MET SAME 1 A/1 B APP. 2 0:00 - 1:00 11 8 19 / 21 / 7 / / 1:00 -2:00 1 6 7 / 6 / 2 / / 2:00 - 3:00 4 4 8 / 2 / 2 / / 3:00 - 4:00 3 3 6 / 0 / 5 / / 4:00 - 5:00 18 8 26 / 6 / 11 / / 5:00 - 6:00 74 60 134 / 12 / 35 / / 6:00 - 7:00 118 191 309 / 58 / 79 /X / 7:00 - 8:00 362 403 765 X/X 127 /X 139 /X /X 8:00 - 9:00 204 192 396 / 77 /X 114 /X / 9:00 - 10:00 152 167 320 / 63 / 105 /X / 10:00 - 11:00 108 117 225 / 88 /X 87 /X / 11 :00 - 12:00 152 180 333 / 103 /X 121 /X 1 12:00 - 13:00 237 156 393 / 186 X/X 103 /X / 13:00 - 14:00 209 138 347 / 191 X/X 110 /X / 14:00 - 15:00 311 214 525 X/ 209 X/X 131 /X X/ 15:00 - 16:00 401 354 755 X/X 223 X/X 171 X/X X/X 16:00 - 17:00 421 366 787 X/X 226 X/X 108 /X X/X 17:00 - 18:00 502 383 885 X/X 222 X/X 143 X/X X/X 18:00 - 19:00 337 307 644 X/X 185 X/X 98 /X X/X 19:00 - 20:00 235 215 450 X/ 145 X/X 59 / X/ 20:00 - 21:00 163 175 337 / 86 /X 50 / / 21:00 - 22:00 46 70 116 / 39 / 11 / / 22:00 - 23:00 29 37 66 / 32 / 7 / / 23:00 - 24:00 14 20 35 / 15 / 6 / / LOCATION: COUNTY: REF. POINT: DATE: OPERATOR: Apple Valley Dakota 6/8/2015 BTN 0.70 FACTOR USED? POPULATION < 10,000? EXISTING SIGNAL ? THRESHOLDS 1A/1B: Warrant 1A Warrant 1B Warrant 2 Warrant 3 Warrant 7 Met (Hr) 6 5 5 2 10 YES No No Required (Hr) 8 8 4 1 8 45 45 30 30 SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS 2017 Projected with Development Speed Approach Description Major App1: Major App3: Minor App2: Minor App4: 420/630 Lanes Johnny Cake Ridge Road Johnny Cake Ridge Road 147th Street 147th Street 2 2 3 3 Not satisfied Not satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied, check accident record 140/70 140/70 LOCATION: Apple Valley COUNTY: Dakota REF. POINT: Speed Approach Description Lanes DATE: 6/8/2015 45 Major App1: Johnny Cake Ridge Road 2 45 Major App3: Johnny Cake Ridge Road 2 OPERATOR: BTN 30 Minor App2: 147th Street 3 30 Minor App4: 147th Street 3 0.70 FACTOR USED? POPULATION < 10,000? EXISTING SIGNAL ? 700 600 v 500 a. Q 400 w E • 300 0 = t > 200 100 0 0 0 0 c YES No No — Warrant 2, Four -hour Volumes — — Warrant 3, Peak -hour Volumes • Actual Hourly Count ■ ■ • • 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - VPH Figure 1. Four Hour and Peak Hour Warrant Analysis Note: For data points outside the graph range, check the minor street volume against the lower thresholds Warrant Criteria Actual Hourly Count Major Warrant 2, F Warrant 3, Pe Major Actual Hourly Count 200 420 19 21 300 350 500 7 6 400 285 435 8 2 500 230 370 6 5 600 175 315 26 11 700 135 260 134 35 800 103 215 309 79 900 80 175 765 139 1000 80 140 396 114 1100 80 115 320 105 1200 80 100 225 88 1300 80 100 333 121 1400 80 100 393 186 1500 80 100 347 191 1600 80 100 525 209 1700 80 100 755 223 1800 80 100 787 226 885 222 644 185 450 145 337 86 116 39 66 32 35 15 Page 5 through the unused area between the staff lot and the fuel depot/bus wash area. The drive would run north - south, east of the staff lot, and then east -west to the south side of the fuel depot. The distance that the bus wash and fuel depot are located from Upper 147t Street may be concern if stacking of buses for the fuel depot and /or bus wash impacts the public roadway system. Mitigation to prevent this should occur if it becomes a concern. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the recent traffic data included in the study, the intersection of Johnny Cake Ridge Road at upper 147t Street meets the justification for a signal or roundabout. Given current operations are acceptable based on service levels, it is recommended the operation of the intersection be monitored until such a time that a change in intersection control is appropriate. The following traffic study updates and access modifications are recommended based on the review: • Add a 10 -year after opening analysis to accommodate any potential site expansion. • Include the intersection of Upper 147t Street and Evendale Way in the 10 year analysis. • Since the intersection of JCRRI147th St currently meets justification for a signal, evaluate the intersection as a signal and as a roundabout in the 10 year analysis, along with the all -way stop. • Move the right -out access onto Johnny Cake Ridge Road as appropriate and revise the geometry to point vehicles more appropriately north upon exiting. • If safety issues arise, access restrictions and/or medians may need to be provided at the site access driveways to Upper 147t Street and Johnny Cake Ridge Road. H:\APVA\N15103965\General Projects\2015\ISD 196 Transportation Hub\ISD 196 Transportation Hub TIS Review - Updated 071015.docx DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer. (.0 LO c\I cr, E c_ Q c H1 3 • • , 46 • SflONIflJI •4 CD 0 ) 1 :1 N- C l< 7 snoNivunila tt o • i . 11 11 ED I C3 1C ILI U . 0 ILI CO 0 O . ©I&1 CC = I i I I 0 O co CO C\I z C91£9 C,90.00N 8.8g. ,S88S. S'ON '000 .8.1 NO11018:1St 00V 1 OVOtd 30CIIEr 3)1 3N11 Ala dada n O J O >-- (( \\ CO cc cc L li - - - 1 1 / 1 / I / 1 1 0 i i 3N11,1 1H13d011d N W m W ✓ N W W 1 Q Z I ez Q V 1A • Y i cz z O tY W X K 3NI1 AlH13d0Ild O Decibel (d6) Range Chart OdB 10d6 1 20dB 30dB 40d6 50dB sods Boas 80dB 90dB 100dB 110d6 120d6 III 130d6 Threshold of human hearing Breathing Whisper, Light snoring Quiet room Moderate snoring Average office noise, Conversation Busy street, Alarm clock Hairdryer, Noisy restaurant Loud radio Bass drum Subway train Industrial noise Jet Plane take off Gunshot, Metal concert DdB: Measuring sound PREVIOUS ACTIVITY How do we measure sound waves? RETURN TO VIRTUAL EXHIBIT INDEX Sound energy travels in waves and is measured in frequency and amplitude. Amplitude measures how forceful the wave is. It is measured in decibels or dBA of sound pressure. 0 dBA is the softest level that a person can hear. Normal speaking voices are around 65 dBA. A rock concert can be about 120 dBA. Sounds that are 85 dBA or above can permanently damage your ears. The more sound pressure a sound has, the less time it takes to cause damage. For example, a sound at 85 dBA may take as long at 8 hours to cause permanent damage, while a sound at 100 dBA can start damaging hair cells after only 30 minutes of listening. Decibel Exposure Time Guidelines Continuous dB 85 dB 88 dB 91 dB 94 dB 97 dB 100 dB 103 dB 106 dB 109 dB 112 dB 115 dB Frequency is measured in the number of sound vibrations in one second. A healthy ear can hear sounds of very low frequency, 20 Hertz (or 20 cycles per second), to a very high frequency of 20,000 Hertz. The lowest A key on the piano is 27 Hertz. The middle C key on a piano creates a 262 Hertz tone. The highest key on the piano is 4186 Hertz. Permissible Exposure Time 8 hours 4 hours 2 hours 1 hour 30 minutes 15 minutes 7.5 minutes 3.75 min (< 4min) 1.875 min (< 2min) .9375 min ( -1 min) .46875 min ( -30 sec) Accepted standards for recommended permissible exposure time for continuous time weighted average noise, according to NIOSH and CDC, 2002. For every 3 dBs over 85dB, the permissible exposure time before possible damage can occur is cut in half. http:// www. dangerousdecibels. org/ virtualexhibit /6measuringsound.html The energy in a sound wave can be measured using Decibels. The Decibel Meter shows examples of things that make noise and measurements in decibels. Page 1 of 1 155 145 135 125 115 105 95 85 75 65 55 45 35 25 15 rocket &lunch 6rewoks gun shot ifrcrn >i r rte e�n�tlulartite jwk tiammcr leaf blower rack cont. i chains. v etto► hair dry, busy city tratf c washing Machine typlrai speech raintal1 whisper :treat %wed you can hear 6/18/2015 q 144TH ST W UPPER 147TH ST W e d e f 0 D I— v) w V z w w I cr) CD z w 0 z w cc w (7 6 1. 0,1 1..47 1.finO 7 3 g9 A4,,00.05 t- ft - „ -7--- - • Z E g ill 1 111..1117 ooyawt licuoon. c c stoz to awie I . • z '`•\‘ ,‘ - = - - - - a "v' 0 0 z V44 z77VGN3A . I 6/ )7' V 0 A/ N /-1 0 P ; J J 21 ®•Z°°°tx.' !- rfoa, 03,41.7, dro. -=-21 ' w z < (1) z 411■ Vir c r ) cn E 4_, 0 c) (a) Cl.) - < 0 a • ° 'H 4 • . , fIN ki I 11 b 11 !Ili rib 111 f 1"° " ze: II ilTh! lb R i i C 11 dg! bed big 11 Lidg 111111/1 1111 411: CC h 1:1 0: 111 111011HHO Hi! !Ai WI 1 111 11 1 I, 111111 bi 411 _ • 111 , - ,,; 1 3(14 -- t - ' it 7 1 V 0 .■ • _ u '(7i 70 7/ 00 z u) u) E fp, C.) 4 ! CL) o „ c l i s .y v A A/ AI o -, ..: , _i a_ _,,,_.7 _ _ ----,,, _ 7: s liCVM ,=,,, ' , - VaAlail, ,g "'i ', '' - 1--- , At Ai Ai o A Ai e '• ! , - 01b; 7'*.------"-- 4 , 12 , 01 , 74414416A17,4641YAA,,i , 1VA.., - • - • : - . : -":”' --- ' . 18118 bliati I Pie AWA " • II" IP eA 4.4. L Pr 1 7 E I 411Ih N N CC ` 4 - a « e a t < c U z Z W Q « °� « ,. O. cd . e C � e� c s e c e t iC� � Pu <� .. - � «d '��' n iG , r n e7[ r .a a .n @ _ O C Cs sd kx e ., d C3 � + a t : n ry �N� < e ®7� r V 9 o- of s o }4 s • Aim t b f C � � `5 o ♦ n • s +4 a , ,.„ a „ P e „ r1 « 2 4 O -0 o> e h b eµ a• ro? c Ej . 4 a C M1 G o �• r o c a o a • < a • a 3NI1 ) L1 J3d0 BERN NOI1V121OdSNVIII 96I aSI r7 h O h v. fi� ✓..'x. ...r - bus- "'.' Performance Requested Volume (CFM) 12,220 Actual Volume (CFM) 12,220 External SP (in. wg) 0.5 Total SP (in. wg) 0.5 Fan RPM 585 Operating Power (hp) 3.01 Elevation (ft) 837 Airstream Temp.(F) 70 Air Density (ft3) 0.073 Drive Loss (%) 4.4 Tip Speed (ft/min) 5,518 Static Eff. (%) 33 Motor Motor Mounted Yes Size (hp) 3 V/C/P 460/60/3 Enclosure ODP Motor RPM 1725 Windings 1 NEC FLA" (Amps) 4.8 Dimensional Quantity 1 Weight w/o Acc's (Ib) 209 Weight w/ Acc's (Ib) 213 Max T Motor Frame Size 215 Roof Opening (in.) 38.5 x 38.5 Sound Data 62.5 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 LwA dBA Sones Inlet 87 90 82 78 74 71 64 58 81 70 19.6 EfIGREENHECK Building Value in Air. Model: GB-330-30 Belt Drive Centrifugal Roof Exhaust Fan Sound Power by Octave Band Operating Bhp point CD Operating point at Total SP 3 Operating point at External SP Fan curve System curve Brake horsepower curve CAPS 4.17.1552 58.75 46 .1 1.75 Reference assembly view drawings for actual dimensions with mounted accessories *Overall height may be greater depending on motor Printed Date: 7/10/2015 Job: ISD#196 Transportation Hub Mark: Mark 1 3 6 9 Volume (CFM) x 1,000 12 Notes: All dimensions shown are in units of in. *FLA - based on tables 150 or 148 of National Electrical Code 2002. Actual motor FLA may vary, for sizing thermal overload, consult factory. LwA -A weighted sound power level, based on ANSI 51.4 dBA - A weighted sound pressure level, based on 11.5 dB attenuation per Octave band at 5 ft - dBA levels are not licensed by AMCA International Sones - calculated using AMCA 301 at 5 ft C:\Users\rcharlton\Documents\CAPS\Jobs\Transportation Hub.gfcj 38.5 ainCa WORLDWIDE CERTIFIED RRTI nos SOUR? AIR N PERFORMAIICE Page 1 of 3 OGREENHECK Printed Date: 7/10/2015 Job: ISD #196 Transportation Hub Building Value in Air. Mark: Mark 1 CAPS 4.17.1552 Model: GB-330-30 Belt Drive Centrifugal Roof Exhaust Fan Standard Construction Features: - Aluminum housing - Backward inclined aluminum wheel - Curb cap with prepunched mounting holes - Motor and drives isolated on shock mounts - Birdscreen - Ball bearing motors - Adjustable motor pulley - Adjustable motor plate - Fan shaft mounted in ball bearing pillow blocks - Bearings meet or exceed temperature rating of fan - Static resistant belts - Corrosion resistant fasteners - Sizes 141 and larger have internal Lifting lugs Selected Options & Accessories: NEMA Premium Efficient Motor - meets NEMA Table 12 -12 Switch, NEMA -1, Toggle, Junction Box Mounted & Wired Bearings with Grease Fittings, L10 life of 100,000 hrs (L50 avg. life 500,000 hrs) Unit Warranty: 1 Yr (Standard) C:\ Users \rcharlton\ Documents \CAPS \Jobs \Transportation Hub.gfcj Page 2 of 3 DIMENSIONS ID # Qty Nominal Width (in.) Nominal Length (in.) Actual W (in.) Actual L (in.) Flange W (in.) Flange L (in.) 1-1 1 46.000 46.000 44.5 44.5 48.5 48.5 Tags: GREENHECK Building Value in Air. Heigh CAPS 4.17.1552 Actual L Actual W 1.75 Flange W Flange L ■ • NOTE: All dimensions shown are in units of inches and are actual size. GPIP SELECTED OPTIONS & ACCESSORIES Nominal Curb Size CONFIGURATION (typical) Material: Galvanized Height (in.): 14 Pitch (X : 12) 0: To Be Selected Pitch Run: Short Side Liner: No Insulation (in.): 1 Coating Type: None Coating Color: N/A Sizing: Nominal Printed Date: 7/10/2015 Job: ISD#196 Transportation Hub Mark: Mark 2 Pitched Roof, Welded with Insulation Standard Construction Features • All welded Aluminum (0.064 in.) or galvanized (18 in.) construction • Straight sided • 2 in. mounting flange • 1 in. 3 lb density insulation • Wood nailer. Roof Opening - The Maximum roof opening dimension should not be greater than the "Actual" top outside dimension minus 2 in.. NOTE: * Height - As specified in "CONFIGURATION (typical)". C:\Users\rcharlton\Documents\CAPS\Jobs\Transportation Hub.gfcj Page 3 of 3 CITY OF Apple Valley TO: Kathy Bodmer, Planner FROM: Brandon S. Anderson, Asst. City Engineer DATE: June 12, 2015 SUBJECT: ISD 196 Transportation Hub Facility Review Kathy, MEMO Public Works The following are comments regarding the ISD Transportation Hub Facility Revised site plan dated June 10, 2015. Please include these items as conditions to approval. General * Vacation of portion of Evendale Way Right-of way on applicant property shall be provided as part of plat approval (generally north of Magellan Easement). • Portions of existing drainage and utility easements along Evendale way shall be vacated to accommodate additional ROW required for Cul-de-Sac. • A 10-foot drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated on final plat behind Evendale Way in Outlot A. • Cul-de-sac at Evendale way shall be constructed to City standards. • All work and infrastructure within public easements or right of way shall be to City standards. • A pre-construction meeting shall be held prior to beginning any work on the site. • No trees will be permitted in public easements. Additional review of landscaping along the eastern property line where the future well is planned should be addressed. Landscaping may be required to be relocated to Outlot A at existing storm water pond • Easements are required for future well water main and site location. Please show easements on site plan as indicated in attached sketch for future well location. Permits Provide a copy of the executed Encroachment Agreement with Magellan Pipeline for work occurring within easement area as indicated on plans. • Provide a copy of the executed Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Met Council, Department of Labor and any other required permits. • A right of way permit will be required for all work within public easements or right of way. • A Natural Resource Management Permit (NRMP) will be required prior to any land disturbing activity commences. Site The revised RO driveway access to Johnny Cake Ridge Road shall be additionally • modified to include a "pork chop island" to prevent unauthorized right turns in and left turns out of the site at this location. Please review the location of curb island south of maintenance bay as it appears that buses will have a difficult time maneuvering from site to RO at JCRR. It appears the curb island should be shifted north to better align drive access with RO at JCRR. Provide update to site traffic study including a 10-year analysis for potential expansion for City Engineer Review. Provide additional dimensions on site plan indicating radiuses, drive lane widths, etc... • Provide additional drawing showing Auto turn bus turning movements to verify site circulation and layout requirements for planned bus vehicle usage to be used by ISD. Please indicate entrance to bus wash as circulation indicates additional bus movements from fuel island and bus wash onto 147 and back around Evendale into garage as internal circulation doesn't appear to allow buses to turn around without backing up. A commercial driveway entrance is required at all access points to public roadways per AV • Plate No. STR-4 or STR-5. Provide pedestrian curb ramp per STR-10 at bituminous path along Johnny Cake Ridge • Road access point. Provide pedestrian curb ramp at proposed "pork chop" channelization island to • accommodate bituminous path along Johnny Cake Ridge Road. • Remove existing driveway access point at NW corner along Johnny Cake Ridge Road and patch curb and gutter to match section at Johnny Cake Ridge Road. Provide concrete valley gutter per STR-11detail with the design of Evendale Way cul-de- sac. • Site Plan should show future expansion of bus storage facility layout to the east to be able to coordinate exact location of future well site and utility and easement requirements. Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control • Provide drainage report and storm sewer calculations for proposed improvements. The applicant shall submit a copy of the General Storm Water Permit approval from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency pursuant to Minnesota Rules 7100.1000 — 7100.1100 regarding the state NPDES Permit prior to commencement of grading activity. Erosion control measures shall be installed prior to beginning grading operations. • A construction entrance shall be provided at all proposed entrances to be utilized for erosion control purposes. • Street sweeping shall be performed as necessary to address material tracking from the site. Additional storm drain inlets are required on Sediment and Erosion Control Plan C1.61 for • existing storm drain inlets within Evendale Way and 147 Street. The location and elevation of the site emergency overflow(s) (EOF) shall be identified on • the plans. All critical HP and LP shall be identified along with drainage arrows. 2% minimum grades are required in all landscaped areas. • • Lowest floor levels shall be 1.0' above the EOF. Storm Sewer O A skimmer is required at the proposed catch-basins directly adjacent to the fuel islands. Provide detail on final plans for approval. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main • Provide additional manhole at the end of 8" sanitary sewer line within Evendale Way right of way. O Provide additional drawing showing required hydrant coverage for site. (max. hydrant spacing is 450-feet for Commercial/Industrial areas.) INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 Rosemou•t-Apple Valley-Eagan Public Schools 3455 153rd Street West Rosemount, MN 55068-49•6 June IL 2015 Bruce Nordquist Community Development Director City of Apple Valley 7100 147 Street W, Apple Valley, MN 55124 Dear Bruce, This letter is in response to two questions the Planning Commission received at the city's May 20 public hearing regarding the school district's plan to develop a transportation hub facility on the northeast corner ofJohnny Cake Ridge Road and 147 Street Please present these as the district's official responses. L Why was this site selected in the search that was undertaken? The district used a real estate professional to assist in conducting a thorough search of available real estate for the transportation hub. Fourteen sites were reviewed, seven in Eagan and seven in Apple Valley, based on the following criteria: appropriate zoning, adequate size, availability for purchase by the time an offer could be made, functionality for operations, site cost, development costs, and proximity to serve as a hub location for the west side (Attie district for the foreseeable future. Fewer than half of the sites met the size criteria and two others were already under contract when the review was conducted. Of the sites that remained, the other criteria clearly identified the proposed site as the most feasible location for the transportation hub facility. 2. We see "expansion area" on some of the plans. What does that mean? The plans recognize that it would be physically possible in the future to grow the length of the proposed building to the east by approximately 25 percent, Forecasting any such future expansion recognizes that growth on the district's east side is projected to continue for several years and that existing routes currently served by buses at the district's transportation facility in Rosemount may or may not become better served at the proposed transportation hub in Apple Valley. Any future change to the hub facility Apple Valley would require an updated conditional use permit, notification of the neighborhood and involvement in the et 's development approval process. Please feel free to contact me with further questions. Sincerely, Jeffrey M. Solomon Jeffrey M. Solomon Director of Finance and Operations 651-423-7713 651-423-7788 (fax) jeff.solomon@districti 96.org ri p Cc: Superintendent Jane Berenz Educating our students to reach their full potential 1 , nu i-r p cif f.frrsf nt A °pie J F E iclan 1* rc'atp ry ...ro• H ht Lik Ii id rprice d Ii CH Townsh www.district196„org June 11, 2015 Ms. Kathy Bodmer, AICP Planner City of Apple Valley 7100 - 147 Street W Apple Valley, MN 55124 RE: ISD 196 Transportation HUB Noise and Air Quality Assessment Dear Ms. Bodmer: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has completed its review of the ISD 196 Transportation Hub Noise and Air Quality Assessment submitted by the City of Apple Valley. Thank you for the opportunity given to review the document. These are our comments: Air Quality Assessment Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North I St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 I 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 651-282-5332 TTY www.pca.state.mn.us I Equal Opportunity Employer CaI3QHC traffic dispersion model was used to estimate concentrations of gaseous pollutants. Particulate matter emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) were estimated at a typical home 130 feet from the traveling buses using a simple point-source atmospheric dispersion mode. The resulting concentrations were compared to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). All the predicted pollutant concentrations from the peak hour for arriving buses were well below standards. In terms of the pollutant concentrations, it is really unlikely that the site would create any exceedance of the air quality standards. There will be a spike in emissions in the morning, and a smaller spike in the afternoon (due to warmer temperatures), as buses leave and then return from their routes. Since PM concentrations are averaged over 24 hours, and annual in the case of PM2.5, I would not expect these relatively short spikes in emissions to cause a violation of the standards judging the size of the bus fleet. There are no NAAQS for diesel particulate emissions (DPM), but EPA has determined that PM2.5 NAAQS are protective of DPM health effects. I definitely wouldn't expect any impacts related to the NO2 NAAQS either. Therefore, based on this analysis, no significant air quality impacts are expected to be associated with the planned transportation Hub facility. I do, however, have some recommendations that could help the buses operate more efficiently: • Good Maintenance - Proper engine maintenance is necessary for optimum fuel economy and extended life as well as to control emissions • Vehicle Replacement - Replacing old buses with new cleaner model can substantially reduce emissions and fuel consumption O Retrofit Technologies - Install diesel retrofit devices with verified technologies Ms. Kathy Bodmer Page 2 June 12, 2015 The NAAQS table that was included on Page 22 of the report needs to be changed and updated. Please find the most recently updated version from EPA (http://www.epa.goviairicriteria.html). Noise Assessment A noise assessment was also conducted for the project. Predicted sound levels conducted for comparison to the daytime L10 standard were well below the level of the standard. The report did not include prediction of L50 levels for comparison to the L50 standard. While I expect that the L50 levels would be similar to those predicted for the L10, based on the nature of the noise (an hour or so of buses coming and going with some regularity), and therefore likely below the level of the standard, I would recommend that the L50 noise level predictions be provided for better comparison to the L50 standard. I also agree with the recommendation that to minimize any noise impacts on the adjacent residential neighborhood, a fence should be constructed along the north property line. Additionally, garage doors should be closed when most buses depart in the morning. If you have any questions about air quality comments, please contact me at 651-757-2347 or by email at innocent.eyoh@state.mn.us. For noise comments, please contact Melissa Kuskie at 651-757-2514 or by email at melissa.kuskie@state.mn.us. Sin; erely, 1E/AJS:je • Operational Strategies and Idle Reduction - I would recommend using block heaters so that drivers can just start the buses and leave, instead of idling for a long period of time. The cost of the block heaters would be offset by savings in fuel from idling over a relatively short period O Cleaner Fuels - Using cleaner fuels including natural gas and propane if available would help reduce emissions. noc nt Eyoh Planner Principal Air Assessment Section Environmental Analysis and Outcomes Division cc: Shannon Lotthammer, MPCA Frank Kohlasch, MPCA Mary Jean Fenske, MPCA Amanda Jarrett Smith, MPCA Melissa Kuskie, MPCA Michael Nelson, MPCA Prevailing Winds Minneapolis/St. Paul Month School Yea September November January February arc April Summer Vacation: June Wind Direction 315 292 292 315 Compass Direction NW WNW WNW NW Source: Windfinder.com MSP Airport, — 4/2015 Daily Readings 7:00 a.m. — 7:00 p.m. Time Planned A.M. Depart % Planned Observed A.M. Depart* % Obsry 6:00 -6:15 12 14.3% 22 15.9% 6:15 -6:30 30 35.7% 34 24.6% 6:30 -6:45 12 14.3% 25 18.1% 8 9.5% 23 16.7% 7:00 -7:15 7 8.3% 18 13.0% 7:15 -7:30 8 9.5% 16 11.6% 7:30 -7:45 7 8.3% 84 138 ISD 196 Bus Distribution A.M. * A.M. bus departures observed at Rosemount Bus Storage Facility, 15180 Canada Avenue, Thursday, June 4, 2015. Planned vs. Observed A.M. Departures 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% t.") Qsszs ts") O' � '�� O Yr � '` . O ' , . � '` . '\ � �'. �?� ko' 'V. 'v• ,\ *. % Planned Depart New Hub % Observed Depart Note: ISD 196 provided its bus departure plan for the 84 buses at the new transportation hub facility. The planned departures were compared to the bus departures observed on June 4, 2015, at the ISD 196 Bus Storage Facility at 15180 Canada Avenue. 8 z 0 G jw w< z a A tij EL 041031 201 4 Di LJ Oblique Aerial Study 111 - 0" # 0,/ri/21,14 1 of 25 3 1 , 1111' , ‘ I * b: • - 41*"'' 14;4 *OL # 4 , 0 0‘. 8 3 ' * 414 4 0.* 10 ) x Oblique Aerial Study mt - mS 4 i :r 4 .., .. w AI* 4 is. A. 44 # 4410 • -- 3" , • ;0, :4,1 1 - • Oblique Aerial Study k • • I ti or.* 410 4tr' $16 A i aLIL 4 44 11111 - t 4, f * 4 4 , . airy 411 ' 0 111 ,_. ,,,,,,,;. ) iii ..-, , ■ , ..-,.., ' 'ff. 41' .., ,.... , -''. i 4 lip , ,, r . # '41t ;ilit. . . ,.... ,- ,..„:-....,.:, ,,,,q,-,„ —.. „itielt . ...: ..: ... ., • f: ''''' it 4,7 Thursday, July 2, 2015 (2:30 PM) Attendees: Bacl_cmost The Homeowners located along 144 St W are expressing frustration at the procedure being applied to the "Transportation Hub" proposal submitted by the City (on behalf of ISD-196). The homeowners have gathered input from 110 citizens of Apple Valley in the immediate vicinity of the proposal, and have attained no less than 108 signatures on a petition simply asking that the city deny development of a Transportation Hub at that location. We believe the site is "Not a Good Fit", and have provided a number of "better options" for this type of a facility. Furthermore, residents have cited numerous references to existing City Ordinances and Core-Value statements supporting this opinion. Conditional Use Permits exist to provide flexibility. But residents feel it is unwise and in- appropriate to stretch zoning definitions, allow multiple CUPs, and variances in order to squeeze a Noisy, Property Value-degrading facility directly next-door to a quiet, single-family residential area The fence is already being labeled "The Great Wall of Apple Valley". Subject: -Mike Erdmann, Maggie Futhey, Misty Scholler (via phone) (Residents/Homeowners) -Ms. Mary Hamann-Roland (Mayor, Apple Valley) -Mr. Bruce Nordquist (Community Development Director) -Ms. Kathy Bodmer (City Planner) -Mr. Tom Lowell The Homeowners spoke during 2 public hearings held during Planning Committee meetings. The public hearings have been closed, prior to all the issues regarding Noise, Property Values, and Screening(Fence) have been heard. Furthermore, we do not feel the City is providing adequate advocacy on behalf of the Homeowners in accordance with the City's stated Core-Values. The data presented by the City (on behalf of ISD-196) has given homeowners the distinct impression that the City is endorsing the development. 1) The Traffic data presented (supplied by ISD-196) omitted all mention of the "shuffling" of busses within the facility. On-Site observations of similar facilities encounter different view. 2) The Traffic Study omitted interactions with intersections (only 1 intersection was analyzed). 3) The Noise Study was presented to Planning Committee in a misleading fashion ("zoomed-in" to magnify noise abatement). a. Note: Increasing the size of the fence (8->12' requires a variance). b. Note: Increasing the height of the fence (by 50%) does NOT improve its efficacy. Resident Correspondence 1 of 60 i. Only 2-3 decibels addftional Noise abatemend N. Shows fence material is "Max`d Out" (a poor materia C. Note: Increasing the height of the fence imposes significant impact upon adjacent properties. 4) ISD-196 has conducted a Neighborhood meeting, but actual details were scant. Details regarding the facility have changed frequently, with the only inclusion of the residents being the packets presented to the Planning Committee. 5) The Planning Committee closed the Public Hearing after having giving ISD-196 forum to discuss Property Values, but denied residents an equivalent forum to counter1SD-196's claims. 6) The City Planner's office has called a meeting (on behalf of ISD-196) and given homeowners a decidedly-strong message that this is our one-and-only opportunity to have input regarding screening (fence). a. Participation in this meeting strongly implies "Resignated Consent" from Residents prior to being presented to Planning Committee (advisory vote) and City-Council members (official vote). We feel this approach forces residents into submitting. b. The meeting was called with less than 1 week notification to residents. Several are unable to secure time-of from work. Notably, another is unavoidably out-of-town and cannot participate. 7) Un-confirmed reports are surfacing that not all the affected (adjacent) property owners are even aware of the proceedings. We have not heard from Lifeworks, yet they are obviously going to be affected by increased traffic directly past their facility. 8) Details regarding the Fencing have changed so frequently that Homeowners are becoming frustrated with keeping-up (yet the approval process is continuing). The homeowners want the City to appoint an Advocate to guide them through the process. We also want the City to verify that all property owners are confirmed to have been notified. The homeowners want the Citytonota/|ovv|SD-l96to7orce"the|rproposa|throughthe[hy'sprocess. We also want the City to require resolution to our outstanding issues before allowing the proceedings to continue. Resident Correspondence 2 of 60 The homeowners want ISD-196 to provide ACTUAL disclosure of locations explored. However, we also want 1SD-196 to repeat it's search criteria. We believe ISD-196's reluctance to provide such disclosure demonstrates their reluctance to explore alternatives (at the cost of invested time/money). To that end, Homeowners have provided a number of alternatives (mostly satisfying ISD-196's needs). Both in the immediate vicinity to existing 1SD-196 facilities, and in vicinity to areas that will not be negatively- impacted as much as a Single-Family Residential zone. The homeowners ultimately would like ISD-196 to choose a better-suited location. We feel the location was chosen not based upon limited 1-1/1-2 availability. Rather, chosen due to un-restricted access to roads (no stop-lights), least amount of money required to secure the property. City of 0** 0 0 0 *0 0 0* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 App e Valley 7100 — 147th Street West Apple Valley, MN 55124 Dear Scoftsbriar Neighbor, A neighborhood meeting is planned for Monday, July 6, 2015, from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. to discuss the ISD 196 Transportation Hub Facility project with the neighbors immediately abutting the proposed hub facility property. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the fencing that is proposed for the ISD 196 Transportation Hub Facility. Scottsbriar Neighborhood Meeting Monday July 6, 2015 6:00 p.m. — 7:30 p.m. Apple Valley Municipal Center, 7100 — 147 Street West, Apple Valley On April 29, 2015, ISD 196 submitted an application to construct a transportation hub facility on the northeast corner of Johnny Cake Ridge Road and Upper 147 Street W for the storage and maintenance of 84 school buses. To do that ISD 196 is requesting the following land use actions: Subdivision by preliminary plat to subdivide the existing 15,8-acre parcel to create a I 0.2-acre lot for the transportation hub. Conditional use permit (CUP) for the operation of a bus storage and maintenance facility in an I-1 (Limited Industrial) zoning district. CUP for a screened outdoor storage area for a maximum of six buses. Site plan review/building permit authorization for a 60,000 sq. ft. transportation hub facility. At the June 17, 2015, Planning Commission meeting, the Transportation Hub Facility plans were reviewed in detail. The Noise Assessment Study conducted by David Braslau, David Braslau Associates, Inc., recommends the construction of either an 8' tall or 12' tall fence along the north property line. The School District is finalizing the fence design and would like to receive feedback from the eleven neighbors who would be directly impacted by the proposed fence. If you are unable to attend the meeting but would like to meet to review and discuss your specific situation, please feel free to contact me at (952) 953-2503. Sincerely, CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Kathy Bodmer, AICP Planning & Development Depa ent Resident Correspondence 3 of 60 Telephone: (952) 953-2500 Fax (952) 953-2515 vvww.cityofapplevalley.org (/41-5),e) Proposed 5' Tall Fence RENDERINGS — PROPOSED NORTH FENCE Proposed 12' Tall Fence A - Development Project Review Coin The City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan guides the development of this site for "ID" (Industrial) uses. A bus storage and maintenance facility is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation. However, the site is immediately adjacent to the Scottsbriar neighborhood which following raises the fallo� -� �n issues addressed in the Comp Plan: 1. "An important value of the City' is to preserve the vitality, social interaction and cohesiveness of residential neighborhoods. One technique that can support this value is to require buffers to P rotect property values, provide neighborhood identification and promote aesthetically pleasing developments p. 4-4)." "Desirable uses in employment areas should consist of office, office-showroom, services, medical, health care, research and development and forms of light industrial land use that produce minimal noise, odor, or other forms of pollution. Undesirable uses are those that have high levels of noise, traffic congestion, odor, dust, vibration, lighting, and unmitigated contamination (pp. 4 -5 to 4 -6)." Zoning: The property is zoned I -1" (Limited industrial). A bus storage and maintenance facility is not listed as a permitted or conditional use in the zoning district. I lowever, a "truck and freight terminal and maintenance garage[]" is listed as a conditional use and is a similar use as a bus storage and maintenance facility. Thus, a conditional use permit is needed for the transportation hub. A conditional use is defined in the zoning code as a use that is "... generally not suitable in a particular zoning but which may, under some circumstances, be suitable." The Code further states that g at the petitioner has the burden of proving that the use is suitable and that the standards of the zoning code have been met. g Lastly, the City Council may grant a conditional use permit "if it is determined that the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the comprehensive guide plan and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and would not be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity." p ity� The zoning code requires screening of an industrial use that is within 100' of property zoned for residential use. The plans indicate that an 8' to 12' tall wood fence will be constructed along the north property line. The fence is proposed to have off-sets and articulation which will allow landscaping to be installed on both sides of the fence. A cross- section drawing with shadow study has been prepared that shows both the 8' and I2' tall fence. It should be noted that the rear property line of the Scottsbriar properties abutting the site have a continuous 4' high berm which will help to screen the view of the fence. The noise study indicates that the 12' tall fence provides the best noise attenuation, but an 8' tall fence only provides 2 to 3 decibels less attenuation. A property owner may wish to have a shorter fence if they are concerned about a 12' tall structure adjacent to their rear yard. However, some property owners abutting the development may wish to have a 12' tall fence to provide the best sound attenuation and visual screening. City staff would like to meet with the ro ert owners who abut the north p p y property line to discuss what their preference would be for fence height and landscape treatments adjacent to their property. Preliminary Plat: The property owner and petitioner propose to subdivide the 15.8 -acre property to create a 10.2 -acre lot for the transportation facility and a 5.6 -acre outlot for future development east of Evendale Way. ISD 196 and the property owner propose to not extend Evendale Way out to Pilot. Knob Road as previously planned. Instead, right -of -way is dedicated for a cul -de -sac to terminate Evendale Way south of the pipeline easement. The property owner has submitted an application for vacation of the portion of the right -of -way previously dedicated north of the pipeline easement. The vacation hearing is scheduled to be held at the July 23, 2015, City Council meeting. The City Engineers are reviewing the dedication to ensure it is sufficient size for a commercial cul -de -sac. Resident Correspondence 5 of 60 Site Plan: The approximately 60,000 sq. ft. transportation hub is proposed to consist of a bus storage area, maintenance bays and office area. The 45,700 sq. ft. bus storage area would store 84 buses, 28 buses across and three buses deep. A total of 14 garage doors (six buses behind each door) will be visible on both the north side Mike Erdmann maerdmann From: Sent: To: Subje Erik Hansen fehansenburnshansen,comj Thursday, June 18, 2015 3:24 PM Mike Erdmann (maerdmann) ordinances )LIMITED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT 155.200 PURPOSE. Limited industrial districts are areas which because of availability to thoroughfares, suitable topography and isolation from housing areas, are appropriate for manufacturing, warehousing and similar industrial uses having a minimum of nuisance characteristics. (131 Code, § A1-41) (Ord. 291, passed 4-21-83) )§. 155.201 PERMITTED USES. Within any l-1 district, no structure or land shall be used, except for one or more of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the City Council: (A) Conducting a process, fabrication, storage, manufacturing or wholesaling operation; (B) Auto, marine, truck storage completely within a building; (C) Contractor's office, outdoor storage subject to conditional use; (D) Ice, cold storage plants, bottling works, outdoor storage subject to conditional use; (E) Restaurants, Class I only; (F) Research laboratories; (G) Trade school; (H) Warehouse; (I) Offices; (J) Animal clinics, outdoor pens subject to conditional use; and (K) Major automobile repair and auto body shop, outdoor storage subject to conditional use. (131 Code, § A1-41) (Ord. 291, passed 4-21-83) 0§ 155.202 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. The manufacture, compounding, processing, packaging, treatment, assembly or storage of any products or materials is permitted in the 1-1 district provided the use is not listed as a specific use permitted by right or conditional use in the 1-2 district. Applicants for building permits in the 1-1 district shall submit evidences as may be required by the building inspector to ensure compliance with the performance standards, Should the building inspector have any doubt as to the ability of any proposed use to meet the required standards, the matter shall be referred to the Planning Commission which shall make a recommendation to the City Council to grant or deny the application, ('81 Code, § A1-41) (Ord. 291, passed 4-21-83) § 155.203 CONDITIONAL USES. Within any 1-1 district, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses or uses deemed similar by the City Council, except by conditional use permit: (A) Motor fuel sales, including minor auto repair facilities or car wash; (B) Truck and freight terminals and maintenance garages; (C) Outdoor storage of vehicles or materials on open sales lot; (0) Explosives, including all activities involving the storage, utilization or manufacture of s or products such as TNT or dynamite which could decompose by detonation; (E) Animal kennels with outside pens; (F) Truck stops; 1 Resident Correspondence 6 of 60 (G) Rental lots; (H) Sales yards for building materials; (U Outdoor research or testing facilities; and U> Churches, unless a compelling governmental interes orestrict same is found rel tingto the folio ingorsknUar criteria: (1) When located within a multi-tenant building, a finding that occupancy of more than 50% of the total floor area by combined church uses has an adverse effect upon the remaining occupants; (2) When located within a multi-tenant building, a finding that the number of parking stalls and the time at which they are needed by the church use(s) has an adverse effect by conflicting with the parking needs of the other building occupants; (3) When located as a free-standing facility, a finding that the church use has an adverse effect upon the adjacent and surrounding occupied properties; (4) Churches located under this section shall not be entitled to "sensitive land use" status for the purposes of determining a separation distance from regulated land uses which otherwise require such a separation (K) Tnvversasregulated in § 255'585' ' (L) Child care centers, subject to the following conditions: (1) All child care centers shall be licensed by the State of Minnesota, and shall provide proof of licensure prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. (2) A child care center shall not be conducted in a stand-alone building. (3) A child care center shall not exceed more than 50% of the total building footprint. (4) Applicants requesting a conditional use permit for a child care center shall provide he folio ing fo eview and approval by the city: (a) A site plan, indicating the location of the center, outdoor play areas, garbage receptacles, and similar site characteristics. (b) A list oftenants within the building and neighboring buildings, to ensure the uses are compatible with the proposed child care center. (c) A dimensioned floor plan for both the center and the multi-tenant building, indicating the child care center is 50% or less than the total building footprint. (d) A traffic plan indicating peak hours of traffic generation, and a plan to minimize traffic conflicts between the building tenants. (e) Hours of operation. ('82 Code, § A1-41) (Ord. 291, passed 4-21-8 Am. C]n], 6 7, passed 6~27-96; Am. Ord. 760, passed 10^14404 Am. �rd 806, passed 3-22-07) ' ' ' L § 155.204 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES. Within any 1-1 district, the following uses or uses deemed similar by the City Council shall be permitted: (A) Off-street parking, storage garage and buildings and loading as regulated in this chapter; (B) Buildings, trailers, unscreened trash dumpsters, or portable storage units temporarily located on the sub/ectlot only for the purposes of construction on the pnenn/sesfor a period of time not to exceed time necessary for such construction. Trash dumpsters shall be removed from the subject lot when full; (C) Essential public service facilities; and (D) Essential security and safety facilities as approved by the City Council. (E) Outdoor dining area, subject to the regulations set forth in this chapter. ('81 Code, § A1-41) (Ord. 291, passed 4-21-83; Am. Ord. 780, passed 10-14-04; Am. Ord. 794, passed 8-24-06) L § 15�.205 ADDITIONAL LOT REQUIREMENTS. (A) Whenever an 1-1 district abuts an R district or an M district, a fence or compact evergreen hedge, not less than 50% opaque nor less than six feet in height, except adjacent to a street, shall be erected and maintained along the side and rear property lines that abut the R or M district. (B) Loading docks shall not be permitted along the part cula side of a building which faces a public street. 2 Resident Correspondence 7 of 60 Also, are they going to gas buses here? § 155.356 MOTOR FUEL STATION DESIGN. Motor fuel stations shall be subject to the following standards: (A) The minimum required building setback shall relate to any canopy, r a her protection pump island or building. (B) The sale or rental of motor vehicles. trailers, campers, boats and other items which are not kept entirely within the building shall require an approved open sales lot. In any instance, these vehicles shall only be permitted at the side or rear of the motor fuel station lot. (C) A minimum 20-foot landscaped yard shall be provided along all abutting public right-of- ay lines, except where approved driveways occur. (D) All goods offered for sale on the motor fuel station site, other than those generally required for the operation and maintenance of motor vehicles, shall be stored, sold and displayed within a building. (E) All trash, waste material and unwanted motor vehicle parts shall be stored within a separate enclosure behind the building or within the building. (F) The outdoor lighting system shall be approved by the city and shall be so designed to prevent any undue light being directly visible from the public right-of-way or abutting lots. (G) Wherever a motor fuel station abuts a residential district, a solid screen, not less than six feet high, shall be erected and maintained along the side and rear property line that abuts the residential district. (H) The entrance doors for any service stalls shall not face toward a principal or minor arterial. (I) A minimum of two off-street parking spaces for each service bay shall be provided at the side or rear of the principal building. (' 81 Code, § A1-66) (Ord. 291, passed 4-21-83) Burns I Hansen Erik F. Hansen, Esq. Attorney 952.564.6252(Direct) I 952.564.6253 (Direct Fax) 952.564.6262 (Main 8401 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 300 I Minneapolis, Minnesota 55426 eh .n n@b rnshansen.com I www.burnshansen.com 3 Resident Correspondence 8 of 60 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 Rosemount -Apple Valley -Eagan Public Schools Educating our students to reach their full potential 2015 -16 SCHOOL BOARD MEETINGS Approved at the March 9, 2015 . Board Meeting The following regular School Board meetings will begin at 6 g g p.m. at Dakota Ridge School, 4629 144 Street W., Apple Valley, Minnesota: July 27, 2015 . August 17, 2015 September 14 and 28, 2015 . October 12 and 26, 2015 November 9, 2015 December 14, 2015 January 4, 2016 February 8, 2016 March 14, 2016 April 4 and 18, 2016 May 9, 2016 June 13 and 27, 2016 Special School Board meetings are tentatively scheduled on Monday, July 13, 2015 and Monday, January 25, 2016 at locations yet to be determined. Agendas, exhibits and on- demand streaming of al regular Schoo Board meetings are available on the District 196 website at vvvvw districtl96.o School Board meetings are also shown on local cable television systems stems that serve District 196. Check your local y y al cable listing for the program schedule. Call 651-423-7723 if you have questions about School Board meetings. Resident Correspondence 9 of 60 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan, Minnesota Educating our students to reach their full potential Series Number 204.7AR Adopted October 1977 Revised Feb Title Public Pa Regulation 204.7AR/2-23-09 1. Members of the public are encouraged to attend School Board meetings to learn more about district activities and programs, and to express their concerns, comments and suggestions. Members of the public may participate in regular School Board meetings as described below. 2. Addressing Agenda Items - Members of the public may address agenda items in the Reports, Old Business, New Business and Other Action portions of board meetings when recognized by the board chairperson. 2.1 Speakers will be asked to identify themselves before they begin their comments. 4. General Guidelines ation at School Board Meetin Resident Correspondence 10 of 60 2009 2.2 A member of the public will be allowed to speak one time per agenda item for up to two minutes. Addressing the School Board about Issues Not on the Agenda - To permit the public to be heard, and at the same time to conduct its meetings properly and efficiently, the following processes have been established for people who wish to address the board about topics that are not on the board agenda: 3.1 Special Communication Request - A member of the public may submit a written request (Procedure 204.7.3P, Special Communication Request) to the secretary to the School Board no less than five working days before the board meeting at which they wish to speak. This request and any related information submitted by the person will be shared with members of the board before the board meeting. People speaking to a specific request shall be allowed a total of five minutes for their comments, unless granted an extension of time by the board chairperson at the board meeting. 3.2 Open Forum - A member of the public may sign up 30 minutes before a board meeting begins to speak during the Open Forum period of the meeting. Up to seven people will be allowed to speak for up to two minutes each during each Open Forum. 4.1 Speakers may offer objective criticism of school operations and programs, but the board will not hear complaints about specific school personnel or other individuals at a public session. 4.2 Members of the public appearing before the board shall be reminded that questions and requests directed to the board will usually be deferred pending appropriate administrative and board consideration. Once the administration has investigated the questions or issues raised by a speaker at a board meeting, the findings will be reviewed with the board before the administration responds to the speaker on behalf of the board. 4.3 If any speaker does not adhere to the above guidelines, the board chairperson may rule that the speaker is out of order and may require the speaker to end his or her presentation. Print Page 1 of 2 Subject: Bus garage statement From: Steve Hall (steve@barkerhedges.com) To: maerdmann@ymail.com: Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 12:48 PM Mike. Feel free to use "In the 8 years that I have been a licensed real estate agent, I have seen many circumstances that have affected the value of residential homes and their resale potential. Busy streets, industrial and commercial buildings, overhead power lines to name just a few. Two identical homes have different values when one is in a purely residential area versus one next to property that has high traffic, noise, odors, etc. Not only is there a ftwe value difference, but when a home owner markets their home for sale, the underlying value is also affected by a longer time on the market, further depleting resale value. The home owners on 1 441/7 St that back up to the proposed bus barn purchased their homes with that land zoned for agriculture purposes. A bus barn on that property will dramatically change the levels °flight pollution, noise pollution and odors to the neighborhood and will this undoubtedly affect property values. While I have not been able to find a case specific to this', I have seen several home appraisals that contribute a $20,000 - $25,000 lesser value in homes that are adjacent to busy streets and commercial property to those that are not. In my professional opinion, I don't see why a bus barn would not also cause a drop in neighborhood property values by at least that much." Steve Hall RE/MAX RESULTS Barker I ledges Group Office 651-789-5001 Cell 612-363-1632 Fax 651-688-3013 v.bark d s.co Ike: Resident Correspondence https ://us-mg6.mail.yahoo.co ineo aunch?.rand—lif5i266 f9r 7/2/2015 Subject: Bus Depot From: Brian Hasselman (bhass71@yahoo.com) To: kmfuthey@charternet; maerdmann@ymail.com; Date: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 1:45 PM I got your flyer last night about the bus depot. Although we didn't get an opportunity to sign the petition we oppose the bus depot as well. I wont be able to attend the meeting next Wednesday as I will be out of town. Here are some of my thoughts, currently bus depots for numerous districts including South Washington County, Burnsville/Savage, St. Paul are located in heavy industrial areas. The reason are obvious and have all been listed in your flier. I do find it ridiculous and somewhat patronizing that these meetings are being held after the district has already purchased the property and clearly plan on building this depot. As far as ideas to stop the building of this depot here are a couple of thoughts. If these have already been brought up I apologize. The first is the current City Ordinance that prohibits the noise that will be coming from the depot between the hours of 10 pm and 6am. Also, I believe the city advocated for coordinated garbage pickup to alleviate large commercial vehicles coming through neighborhoods 7 days a week. This bus depot completely contradicts that idea. I have spent a significant amount of time in the area of one of the St. Paul school districts bus depot which is located off of Roselawn and Rice Street in St. Paul. I can tell you that all hours of the day buses are coming and going. The most discouraging part is the buses when backing up to park have the loud beeping noises for safety reasons. Also the drivers prior to even backing up were required to honk the bus horn. This happened all day long. This is my biggest concern. I wish I was able to take a video of this to show how bad the noise was all day long unfortunately, I just cant get down their before this meeting. Also our family has been supportive of the school districts referendums that have included tax increases. If this bus depot happens that will stop. Maybe giving the petition and letting school board members know the neighborhood's dissatisfaction will also help. Just some thoughts. Appreciate the effort to try and stop this. Brian and Andrea 5600 block of 144th Street est Resident Correspondence https://us-mg6.rnail.yahoo.cornIneo/1aunch.raid=23ej grn Page 1 of 1 7/2/2015 C C 3 w to U3 3 0 a UI ft; 3 X 0 C.) g mi ID 3 ID UI siri* tn ID Resident Correspondence 14 of 60 co 0 4 4C c co tO c t C f Resident Correspondence 16 of 60 Resident Correspondence 17 of 60 Resident Correspondence 18 of 60 � , Resident Correspondence 20 of 60 .41ris* Resident Correspondence 21 of 60 Resident Correspondence 22 of 60 Resident Correspondence 23 of 60 Resident Correspondence 24 of 60 Additional Comments from Neighborhood Received at June 17, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Resident Correspondence 25 of 60 Additional Correspondence Resident Correspondence 26 of 60 Print Page 1 of 1 Subject: Bus Depot From: Brian Hasseiman (bhass71yahoo,com) To: kmfuthey@charternet; maerdmann@ym .com: Date: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 1:45 PM I got your flyer last night about the bus depot. Although we didn't get an opportunity to sign the petition we oppose the bus depot as well. 1 wont be able to attend the meeting next Wednesday as 1 will be out of town. Here are some of my thoughts, currently bus depots for numerous districts including South Washington County, Burnsville/Savage, St. Paul are located in heavy industrial areas. The reason are obvious and have all been listed in your flier. 1 do find it ridiculous and somewhat patronizing that these meetings are being held after the district has already purchased the property and clearly plan on building this depot. As far as ideas to stop the building of this depot here are a couple of thoughts, If these have already been brought up 1 apologize. The first is the current City Ordinance that prohibits the noise that will be coming from the depot between the hours of 10 pm and 6am. Also, 1 believe the city advocated for coordinated garbage pickup to alleviate large commercial vehicles coming through neighborhoods 7 days a week. This bus depot completely contradicts that idea. 1 have spent a significant amount of time in the area of one of the St. Paul school districts bus depot which is located off of Roselawn and Rice Street in St. Paul. loan tell you that all hours of the day buses are coming and going. The most discouraging part is the buses when backing up to park have the loud beeping noises for safety reasons. Also the drivers prior to even backing up were required to honk the bus horn. This happened all day long. This is my biggest concern. 1 wish I was able to take a video of this to show how bad the noise was all day long unfortunately, 1 just cant get down their before this meeting. Also our family has been supportive of the school districts referendums that have included fax increases. If this bus depot happens that will stop. Maybe giving the petition and letting school board members know the neighborhood's dissatisfaction will also help. Just some thoughts. Appreciate the effort to try and stop this. Brian and Andrea 5600 block of 144th Street West Resident Correspondence 27 of 6A haps://us-mg6.mail.yahoo.co neo/ unc 6/ /2 Additional Signatures Resident Correspondence 28 of 60 Resident Correspondence 29 of 60 z 0 Bus Facility Zoning Exat Resident Correspondence 30 of 60 es 0 Z Lti c75 (7) ,-( =C30 0 = 3 N> ( 7, N> CD ' CD CD 0 , 0) 0) N) 0 0 0 CO 0 3 r - 0 11 .. - o V) o o o (i) 0 o o o 0 0 o — =74 (I) CD cf) ET E n a) '< U) 0 0 eZ 00 00 < • • • • • 0 EE E 90 C") a a) a) a) (1) ,...., C: 0 0 Q. 4.1 cr cr 0 "0 0 Resident Correspondence 31 of 60 N.) CD . 1) 0 0 00 Cr) (t) C.0 CO 0 ---- 0 0 0 0) (fl ......., ........- ..,.... .........- 0 0 0 0 0 cr) ---t a) = to ro M _...,, .... CD 0) r _ 5 , 0 k a a c n 1 3 0 CD CD - 0 0 0 cr ( 75 5 5, 6 0 -6- -13 4 0 8 I) 13 = 0 — (1) El ) = n 1 K cn 0 A cl) 2 0 C 03 0 Cr = a) (f) < 0 0) D co 0 (1) 0 0) $.< a c fa) w 0 rt) c7) N CD — CD CD 0) -n Aerial Views (Map Quest) Of Adjacent Zoning Resident Correspondence 32 of 60 LOCATIONS OF TRANSPORTATION HUBS IN THE IN CITIES METRO AREA: 1 ISD 194 LAKEVILLE, MN 2) ISO 191 BURNSVILLE /EAGAN/SAVAGE 3) ISD 271 BLOOMINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS 4) ISD 273 EDINA 5) ISD 283 ST LOUIS PARK 6) MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS -- P & SUBURBAN BUS CO. 7) ST PAUL PUBLIC SCHOOLS 8) ISD 197 WEST ST PAUL/MENDOTA HEIGHTS /EAGAN 9) ISD 622 NORTH ST PAUL PUBLIC SCHOOLS 10) ISD 199 INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 11) ISD 200 HASTINGS 12) MINNETONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS FIRST STUDENT INC 13) MINNETONKA PUBLIC SCHOOLS MINNETONKA TRANSPORTATION 14) ISD 272 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOLS Resident Correspondence 33 of 60 2 () Pi bury Ave Lakeville. M1 dike Map and Vim MapQuest Map c): 2275t Liflsbury Ave Lakeville, MN 55044-8 Notes Lv 02015 MapOuest, Inc Use of directions and maps is subject to the MaciQuest Terms of Use We make no guarantee of the accuracy of their content, road You assume all risk of use View Terms Df Resident Correspondence 34 of 60 n out uSatdy Page 1 of 1 3100F wa), 13 W Bur Map of: 3100 Highway 13 W Burnsville, MN 55337-1708 sviJle. 1 52015 MapQuest, Inc Use of directions and maps is subject to the Ma You assume all risk of use •, Use , Map and View - MapQuest uest Terms o; Js Notes 1 It g4,5 ti - 60cHR make no guaran Resident Correspondence 35 of 60 Pa e of the accuracy cf their content, road conditions or route usability oou ynuate fkve n, iv Map oi 8801 LyndaV Ave S R!oomington, Mr 55420-2739 hap: apquest.co You assume all risk of use. Terns f Use ' iew vizip u 4ote C 02015 MapQuest. Inc Use of drcuons and maps is subject to the MapQuest orrn ot Us. tivt, make no guarant nt ?a=app.ce o6638!ac1ab2dI2cf9i42c4d Resident Correspondence 36 of 60 cs„ rage 01 1 their content, road condWons or route usability. 6/14/2015 en Ave iv Map of: 5220 Echl Ave Minneapolis, MN 554362312 neapons, MAN ")ateurte iviap a nu e mapk,fuest Not 02015 MapQuest, Inc. Use at directions an maps is subject to the MadQuest Terms of Use. We make no guarani You assume all risk of use Terms of Use apquest.comiprin ?a=app.corec5bc5 7209c8dcd63f6f9 Resident Correspondence 37 of 60 nieni, ns or rag 6/14 ")' ge Tooc1 Ave s m Louis of: 2211 Edgewood Ave S St Louis Park, MN 55 ateiii iviap nc v iew iviapyuest rage i w Notes http://ww apquest.corn/print?a- .ba699b0d3e Resident Correspondence 38 of 60 ,„ t 02015 MapQuest, inc Use of directions and maps is subject to the MapQuest Terms of Use We make no guarantee of the accuracy of their content, oac Gonditions or te usabflty You assume all risk of use ,dse 6 14 2015 322 W leapolis, rvliN saei Map of: 322 W 59 1/2 St Minneapolis, MN 55419-233O • 5 •• • ap ano view - ivAapyuest rage i m Note ,401,44, hap: v, ww.mapquest.co /print?a—app.core.be 1c8604ba699b0d3e9a67 Resident Correspondence 39 of 60 ©2015 Mapfluest, Inc_ Use of directions and maps ubject to the Map-Quest Terms of Use We make no guarantee of the accuracy heir content, road conditions or route usability You assume all risk of use v larrn:s ust 6/14/2015 551 13 Zip Code Satelhte Map. 1 1 Map of Roselawn W & Rice St I\ St Paul, MN 55113 411 bit ill! Att. I t Z7:;" ill III/ J Mori s 5 Tornon C2015 MapQuest, Inc, Use of directions and maps is subject he MapQuest Terms of Use VVe make no guarantee of the accuracy of their content, road •on ' ' route usability, You assume all risk of use V,e'N T er se fie\ J Irnage MapQuest Notes Sk Resident Correspondence 40 of 60 R Page 1 Of 1145 Medalli Dr St Pau I, Sa, .e Map and View - MapQuesi bapquer Map of: 1145 Medallion Dr St Paul, MN 55120-1220 t2015 MapQuesl, Inc Use c ri,rections and maps is subject to the MapQuest Te YOU assume all risk of use , ' ose Notes Resident Correspondence 41 of 60 Use We make no guarantee of the accuracy of their content , road conditions or route usability 1 of 1 2710 13th Ave E St Paul, MN Smell Aap and View - Map Quest Map of: 271C 13th AvL E St Paul, MN 55109-3115 Notes Resident Correspondence 42 of 60 ©2015 MapQuest, Inc Use of clirectQns and maps is subject to the MapQuest Terms of Use We make no guarantee of the accuracy of her You assume all risk of use, A; Terms pi Use ns or route usability of 1 tJjJJJi 11 6030 Carrnen Ave E !me west Map of: 6030 C11_ Ave E Inver Grove Heights, MN 55076 Satellite tp Note nd View - MapQuest L 1 DI Resident Correspondence 43 of 60 (D2015 MapQuest, Inc: Use of directions and maps is subject to the MapQuest Terms of Use We make no guaran e of he a uracy of her content road conditions or route usability You assume all risk of use ' Te:crns of Use a 0 4— 60 Map of: 425 160t1 St E Hastings, MN 55033-4010 • = Si E Hastin.y.s. Sate 02015 MapQuest, Inc Use of directions and maps is slit* You assume all risk of use erf7, Of Use Map and the Map uest T MapQuest Resident Correspondence 44 of 60 s of Use We make no guarantee of the accuracy of their content road conditions or route usability Page 1 of 1 Map of: 5571 Manis(ou Rd Excelsior, MN 65331-8565 aflitou Rd Excelsior. 2015 fvlapQuest, Inc. Use of directions and maps is subj You assume all risk of use • o tfle lap and Vim - MapQuest Resident Correspondence 45 of 60 Notes USA 1( cc, pQuest Terms of Use We make no guarantee of the accuracy of their Page 1 of 1 ent. road corithtions or route usability 835 Decatur Ave N Minneapolis, N ,atellite Map and View - MapQuest masque Map of: 835 Decatur Ave N Minneapolis, MN 55427-4338 t C)2015 MapQuest, Inc Use of directions and map s subjec You assume all risk of use Tern:, Use Notes rY\ 5 riAt Resident Correspondence 46 of 60 „ . "1,,,MON.04145,,041,28V-411., . a r 7th A he MapQuest Terms of Use Vie make no guarantee of the accuracy of their content, road ndtons or route usability Pae 1 of 1 8055 'a ace Rd Eden Frail Praiiie. MN Map of: 805E IcAtallace Rd Eden Prairie, MN 55344-22V' p and View - MapQuest Notes Resident Correspondence 47 of 60 ©2015 MapQuest, inc Use oi directions and maps is subject to the MapQuest Terms of Use W make no guarantee of the accuracy of their You assume all risk of use ref Page 1 of 1 ent, road conditions or route usability Emails from Residents From Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 10:51 AM To: Grawe, Charles Subject: Projected school bus facility Dear Mayor Mary, We have concerns about the projected school bus staging and maintenance facility that is planned for the corner of Johnny Cake and 147th St in Apple Valley. We live at which will be right behind the projected facility. We have concerns about the air quality and noise level that will be affecting us. Even with berms and noise reduction fences it is in our opinion a poor choice for this property. The property values of the homes affected will go down and if we wish to sell in the future who would want to buy a house that abuts a bus garage! Would you want to buy a property like that? Also, is there no other property available that has been looked at that would be better suited? I know of 3 that are just east of Johnny Cake which have no adjacent housing, the one next to the new business center that just opened, the old Fisher Concrete plant, and the one right next to Fisher concrete which is for sale by Menard's. It seems the only reason this location was chosen was because it is considerably cheaper due to the as line running through the middle. I don't believe choosing money over people is the ethical thing to do. Did anyone think of the neighbors this will affect? Sincerely, From: Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 9:54 AM To: Grawe, Charles Subject: Johnny Cake & 147th - Proposed Transportation Hub Mayor Mary & Councilmembers: I'm writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed school bus transportation hub at the corner of Johnny Cake and 147th Street. I attended the informational meeting on March 30, 2015 and came away with numerous concerns about their plan. Although 1 have many concerns about this project, my main concerns are as follows. . Pollution - Air, noise & light pollution will all become factors if this hub is allowed to be built. My 1 0-year-old son attended the meeting with me and said "If they build this, 1 won't be able to play in the back yard because of all the exhaust." 2. Traffic - The increase in traffic in and around that intersection is going to be horrendous and will likely cause more congestion, accidents, and difficulty for those coming in and out of our neighborhood. 3. Visually unappealing - Their plan puts the back of the bus garage very close to the back of my property. Even though they have a plan for a visual barrier, 1 just don't see how it's adequate at all. This is definitely not something I want to see when ! look out my windows or am enjoying my yard. Resident Correspondence 48 of 60 4. Land - In my opinion, their plan to extend the existing berm for the visual barrier is not a plan. Not only would they be encroaching on my property making the very back of my yard virtually unusable, the existing, well-established & mature trees would be put at risk. 5. Property Value - If this bus hub is allowed to be built, 1 can only see the value of my property decreasing. I take great pride in my home and yard and do not want to see all my hard work devalued. 1 do appreciate what they are trying to accomplish by creating a centralized hub. Howeve don't feel this plot of land is the appropriate place for it. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Resident Correspondence 49 of 60 From: Superintendent [mailto: Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2015 11:20 AM To: Cc: Dukek, Randy; Solomon, Jeff; Bodmer, Kathy; Duchscher, Rob; Magnuson, Jackie; Albright, Joel; Coulson, Art; Huusko, Gary; Roseen, Mike; Schutte, Bob Subject: Transporation hub to be located on the Northeast corner of 147th Street & Johnnycake Ridge Road Dear Mrs. Futhey: Thank you for sharing your concerns about the transportation facility. As Chairperson Duchscher emailed you, 1 will respond on behalf of the board. At the meeting on March 30, residents of your neighborhood learned of the process the district followed in searching for a property. The site was chosen because of its location, size and appropriate zoning. Abutment to residential areas was not one of the criteria used during the land search because berms and plantings can be used to mitigate disruption to residential neighbors. 1 understand your concerns about traffic in and out of the neighborhood. Busses will exit the garage through the southern side of the facility in the morning and many will not return until their routes are completed at the end of the day, mitigating the noise and traffic that might be associated with a transportation facility. Evening bus traffic is rare, and summer bus traffic is light as well. We are in the process of conducting traffic and environmental studies of the facility. The anticipated $500,000 savings on the $17 transportation budget will come from decreased mileage and driver-time costs, as well as the ability to eliminate contracted bus services (Marschall Line, Inc. currently operates 32 busses in the district resulting in increased costs). Director of Finance and Operations Jeff Solomon "eff.solomon(d)district196.or)) or Coordinator of Transportation Randy Dukek (randy.dukekCcNistrict196.org) would be happy to meet with you to share more details about bow they arrived at the cost savings. Again, thank you for coming forward with your concerns. 1 am copying the City of Apple Valley with your email and this response. It is important that we work together with our communities on projects affecting the school district and residents. Sincerely, Jane K. Berenz Superintendent From: "Duchscher, Rob" < Date: May 5, 2015 at 7:09:32 PM CDT To Kirk Futhey < >, "Schutte, Bob" < Cc: "Berenz, Jane" < Resident Correspondence 50 of 60 Subject: RE: Transporation hub to be located on the Northeast corner of 47th St re Johnnycake Ridge Road Hi Maggie. .Frn going to ask Jane to reply for the Board. Jane, please reply. Thanks From: on behalf of Kirk Futhey Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 2:37 PM To Duchscher, Rob; Jackie Magnason; Gary I luusko; Art Coulson; Joel Aibrio t; Schutte, Bob Subject: Transporation hub to be located on the Northeast corner of 147th Street & Johnnycake Ridge Road My name is Maggie Futhey and I live at 144th Street West in Apple Valley, MN. 1 have been an Apple Valley resident for 25 years. Resident Correspondence 51 of 60 1 have some concerns regarding the plans for he new transportation hub am hoping you will consider. My house is alongside the property that has been chosen for this transportation hub and while the property has been zoned light industrial for the entire 25 years 1 have lived here, it is less than desirable to have a "Bus Barn" in my backyard. When 1 attended the informational meeting that was held on March 30th 1 learned that there will be 84 buses housed there as well as fulltime stair and a facility that will operate 365 days a year. My initial concerns were air and noise quality, but once I learned of all the vehicles that will be moving in and out of this facility, traffic concerns have moved to the top of the list. But are not my only concerns. This area is already heavily traveled with Eastview High School located just north and west of this location, in addition to Scott Highlands Middle School and Highland Elementary as well as Johnnycake Ridge Park. As you know with any high school there are a lot of young and inexperienced drivers coming and going 9 months of the year. With the addition of 84 school buses in the area coming and going at the same time as these young drivers it becomes a greater concern. Those of us who live in the housing area between 147th street and 142nd street already have a difficult time leaving the neighborhood to get to the main arteries of Johnnycake Ridge Road and Pilot Knob Road. In addition, the City of Apple Valley is helping the business "Uponoor" to grow and will be adding an additional 100 jobs in the near future which is located on the north side of 147th street. During the informational meeting Mr. Solomon indicated that several sites were considered in Apple Valley for this facility. When I asked him if any of the other sites had housing developments next to the site, he said "no". It has also, been communicated that the district will save 500,000 per year in reduced driver time, fuel and contracted transportation costs. If this is true, couldn't that savings, be used to find a location that wasn't so disruptive to a residential area. This residential area is also, part of !SD 196 and I would respectfully request that JSD 196 consider another location for this transportation hub. In addition 1 any requesting documentation that shows how this savings was computed. 1 would also request that the school district consider noise and air quality studies in addition to traffic studies for this area. As a City of Apple Valley taxpayer. an ISD 196 taxpayer and a Minnesota Resident, feel Pe there could be more consideration taken with this project. Thank you, Maggie Futhey Resident Correspondence 52 of 60 Resident Correspondence 53 of 60 Lfl Ni 2 0 uJ uJ 2 0 cr) 0 L.) 2 L.7 0 u_ LJ tol LJ r, Resident Correspondence 54 of 60 Resident Correspondence 55 of 60 rn „ - ) > trr tr 0< 2 2 2 LL, tZ, r, LEJ 4 ,1 CZ 41.1- 2 Lel 47. tzr f." 2 kLi 2 cc a. uJ 2 0 a. 1.\.) , vJ y 13 (V I c ri\ Nf 4.) ) LL Resident Correspondence 56 of 60 57 of 60 Resident Correspondence Resident Correspondence 58 of 60 r-4 0 C\I z 0 (.2 z U-1 uJ 0 V) 0 L) z 0 LL Resident Correspondence 59 of 60 Li) z 0 (.9 UJ LLJ 0 17) 0 z 0 LL ( .9 eL Resident Correspondence 60 of 60 0 CO CO N L r M (8p) lanai punos N O O O O O O N O O LL N M CO N M Bus Spectrum without and with Door (at 50 ft) Noise Consultant Reports I r A Door reduces bus noise level ty 28 dBA --�-- Bus -72 dBA -U-- with Door - 44 dBA 1 I ir AlIPTI gii 0 CO CO N L r M (8p) lanai punos N O O O O O O N O O LL N M CO N M Bus Spectrum without and with Door (at 50 ft) Noise Consultant Reports U) c O � _Cs U y D r- N 2 c0 Cl) >% EL 0 CD Cn a) co (i) > • O � CD Z Tn Ca_ - 0 m Q a� 5 > cli cD 0 CC N 0 Q ce as - (0 c 0 U N a) 'o Z . - 0 a) 0 ;....= --c_ "1"Ti 75 as o) ..c U F- 0 E C c . a) as 0 a) a) U — cn p c ,..c2 a) a) a) u) _a • 0 0 a) C Q (C 4— -a— a) • a) : L.7.., a) � a) • C 0 CO • 5 : 0 N a) 4) 0 a) 0 - > > al 0 Q .�'' N 0 _c 0 0 E o r a — - o c 0 2 o � a) cn m E.D. as 00 r) ,— 0 1 - i - c al 0 . .0 ctS t/) 0 W C as E as -§ ..c o_ u) a) o c •..... co 2 a) -0 m a) _c ..c o :I) a) 2 o_ "Ct's as E "c7) a) o o o o u) c u) al a) C - 5 cn Z5 - o c o a) o 4c-xi _c a) cn Tz cv ,--- = E 22 al ,_co 45 -1.-.5 c\I 2 ..c ..c 1 1 E 5 76 c.o _a 2? - o > c a) ‘4-- a) Tts co cts - o a) L a) E as a) a) a) a) a) a) . u) a) a) .� 0 _c -4- E— — F— cf I— I— E— -0 0 o . .§ C - N C 0 as .? }, a) ? _c ..is • .a' - 5 c 0 cn ) L co O O O 2 N- S 0 RS O Q 0 tr8 8L ZL 99 09 is 8tr Ztr 98 0£ trz 8l O O O O O O CO (0 d' ufJON O O N O N O U) - o W O O U) U) co Co O O O O O CO O O u oN 9 Zl 91- jz OE 9C zV 917 t75 09 99 ZL 8L O O 0 0 N 0 0 N cn T 'C O Q a) r-+ co Q C Q T U in a) . Z O O CO O 0 CD O O N O O O O O CO a) 2 co O O O u1. 99 09 175 817 817 9€ 0€ 178 8l 81 9 Zl 8 O O O O mot' N O O O p W mot' O O N 1- 111111•111111111 L■1■111111111111.111. rim U) E CP. co U) U) a) 2 CO Cl) co • 0 C C co co • • • co co CO' 0 E. U) cts a) 2 al MI 1•! LO c; LC C L() (vep) on as - tO co c 43) 000 CC co w 0 g:t U) 0 0 CL) Cl) t 0 0_ CD 'E c t —3 (cC cn 0 0 0.) CI) cn 5 Z 0 C co c a) a) 4- _c c) (-) (11 C 47-= a) 0 5 a) c 0 _ :0 o LN? ▪ ..c C- • 0 ..c 0) ..._ . 73 C CD a c a) E 45 c ; 15 CD 7:3 cZ2 a) ID 4 0 2 -0 •__. • 8 2 = o . —0) 0 a) - c u) - 12 F.- ..c a5 = ..c n . 0 5 4-a d) C C ca 6 a_ 0 0 ,_ 0) C C5 2 • 'a c _a m 0 -5 0 co -4 E - ' C C _ -= OD co a 0 . CC 6) 7 ; 0 „ 76 a) = i n" - c E . 1 E ...0 - w < 2 ID _c s) tr, • § ! X ' • .... 1 = . = = = II I I 1........., I I 1 ORM Otw 31It13 MIMI" == 1 1 II 1 Ig1111111111111111 fra A Ii0 AVM 3 WON3 A3 HI !LC M le co . c ._. a 0 — _a -- 9'91- . 90 [ . [ [ . . LIZ _ Z'SZ . LC 0 . o c) 0-. CD 2L Z 9 C63 17 Wattage (Electric) or CFM Pneumatic ict d 006 OZO I. 0178 006 0 a) 0 — cc; C ( a) m > ° ci; o o a) ca) 66 1.01. 170 88 7 17 96 [6 1 0 w C CD - Fp - 0 = > al in 0 0 a) o a) _J 1— [01- ZO ZOL 013 013. 013 1-1-1- 0) 2 Ingersoll- Rand Husky Husky NEMeCl POPu iluMea co c (...) c.) a) cu Q F U) 1/2-inch chuck 1/2-inch chuck 1/2-inch chuck 1 /2-inch chuck 1 /2-inch chuck 1/2-inch chuck , . 1 /2-inch chuck Tu 0 0 2 01-EZ1 0171.17H H4103 Z6ZAAC1 00C9b1 VN 06ZMCI a) > F- Impact Wrench . . Impact Wrench Impact Wrench ! Impact Wrench . Impact Wrench Impact Wrench . . Impact Wrench http://wwwn.cdc.gov/Niosh-Sound-Vibration/Results.aspx?tt=6 Air Wrench Sound Levels US Center for Diesase Control and Prevention (incl. noise and hearing) � - 0 c , V 4- E .c c� -f--+ (7 o O a) } , --(Ti '5 s) -c _c >> a) U iti o o0 .-.=, E ..c 47) O a) c a) 15 = o 2 a) � '5��� o - CZ O co U - 'p O a s st e" - c cn � � E ._ c 7F-. ^ �000 a) O a) - f - C � = > as C o . + O E -c c� a) a) 0) 2 p O) fc)-o O a) V O CZ 7 D `~ C _c E O O O U U, a) O a) .— c, .. U o cn O a) cz a) EL? ..-"S C,) i > o as as a) a) � = L_ ._ N 0 O I — U O o 0 o = O .�- "� p a) = Cn �-' . a) -� O O U C -O : O - ,} a) O .Q O _c U) �- -0 o as o E E cti -c -2 % -- c� d) >' L- C O a) �"' C D O _c 2 45 0 C O D 0 0 O L O i O U a 0 0 U) p a) C > p a) O X +-� — T p N Q r Q O U i — a ) X C }' O O -� J a)a)O s? a)� 0 r -°o o o +- O O ♦ --+ c _ O v O O .- ..-,z, O L= a) aE O U N a) o 1 ?5 >' o Z3 0 U () '- lc = a) .— to 3 Cn O) = Cl) O L' 2 ctS O --� . s– _, cz — . Q) O 0 c� E O O a) �-- CV cT to as C cts _c o i 0 0 0) E -Ea a) > ; - : ' a) a) 2 - o cn 00 O o U = a s a) CD = O CZ }' O O N U -Co U Q 2 0 p -C co cm (D C C a) ,= C C m = CI) 4-1 t t . a) a E a) a) c i a) a) c) - a) o o C C O .: -i-i > L- s-- o o I-- _a C C F- F- F- O Q Q W ° F- co o m 0 00 0 Lfl JON 0) 0 0 C C C CO C 0 C 0) Ca 0 0 0- 0 E c0 c) c cj) � 0 - 0 a) ai (1) ( +i s ' ev E 0 cL 0E0 � o m � cts >1'N Ci) "I" RS 0 � CO > C 0 ci) CD -a 03 • '-- 13 CD D LO =---- U) 0 —I § 0 0 o < T it• -1 Z5 p a) co • E -c) s + (i) > Q_0 p _I p • -c . E 5< E CD 0 ca Lo. LO 0 0 cT5 a) E I a) a) a) 0 a) E E >7 Ct E C a) Ct U) a) 0 0 t Ct a) F- as 0 Ct 77) a) E Ct 0 10 a) co 0 Ct E CD ( C _CD > a) 0 cn O 0 o a) - o co (.0 co as a) O • U) a) 10 — - E C x as 0 L 0 a) o 0 " O 0 -C • P c O - o a) o x 0_ a) 0 Ct 0 co ci) > cij a) o -- Lc) a) > • ,- - o CO 0 LO C) U) 0 ca 0 (/) Ct 0 0 C/) a) C co a) a) a) Tf) a) Ct Ct D _c c -I- CC - 0 V) < - CO <0 03 0 P LOQ (.0 Lo 0 C1) _C Ct C O ,TD U) _CD •-. Co - 0 a U) .0 0 . as - o as Cl) a) E 0 as L ■•■■■■•■•■■•■••■■■ I ______11111111611111 0 C a) _Ea E C', C C i o o cp o o o 6 6 cri 6 Lri cc) (c) co L() (tf El 1)) 011 N - U) 0 0 a) (.0 w o 0 U) CC 10 C\J Cr) 0 U) Co C 0 —1 • • 0 1111111i111111111 111111111611111111 ___1111111111111111 !El 6 101.1101111111. rim C) 0 E C) C) !IN MI MI irD 0 0 C C C o co co 4 " cd co 4 L() In u") (vaP) os7 L() c\I a) v a) co O E • a) N O _c o) a) vo •= O cn • CD . O U 0 CD <e CO 0 Q) O o a) • - ° a) N � O) i Q � � O Lo Lo P_ - O C of) (1 9 CD O j , o a) O O • cn s ▪ a) a) o o E I-- o .= LO 7 3 e O O 'i � O) a) a) E off = C t -0 u) a _ - > 7 0 ) _c al ---§" c al _ a) o) 8 a CI) co - ( 7 ) --,7 - 4 5' ( 5) ) E P c co 2 4: _- • (5 - 0 2 -0 o -O -� � � O (xi "( C •+ cn a) L C _ U �,; o crS aE • o � o U oaf D -0 C .c� U) cCS o - 0 4-' al a ° 0) _c `u O 0 c� 4 U +,, a) U 0 U .� N > = O O? C-0 0 _ cm ...-= w § 22 - E _a - c c a) R U • s n O - a p a) - 3 1 .> o E U) O +-� O O > o' o co 0 _a.c a) t� • C a) c (1) ▪ C - 0 -C g 0. C O O M i �--a C a) a) 0 (!) C O E Z O O cz c _c u) a) a) C'7 O O .+-► O a) a) a) c 6 .>: _c • (D T., 'a 0 E O = . C c� c ▪ o: a) as o • > , . -C o . — : U) O cis >' u) c co • 77) • o _� >, o - 0 0 _c a.) • _a 8 -- (D o) U a) o W W( � o v) "0 . ai 0 o C E "r) c E 0 dr) - 1 2 _C - i7.. _ ..0 a) • 4- c - ' a) a) +6 E >, u 9 . 0 u) 0 -- � ® � u o � o � a) � o � cn CD O � cn a?-0 E N E a) - 5 - a) a) a) 4- g O O !— m L O (� - U-0 °�oz._ : � W u(D) - E ova) �fi - a) o U U a cn 00 o °~ cn • a) o 0 ▪ o v) O _ -0 E 0 ci) co E O :� E � O- O 0 O I— m Co I- o c I-- cI) - MO N 311Y3 ANNI Of A1Ha SNd(111H91d Independent School District 196 Rosemount, Minnesota Apple Valley Transportation Hub Noise and Air Quality Assessment Prepared for Independent School District 196 by David Braslau Associates, Inc. 10 May 2015 Noise Consultant Reports 20 of 46 Independent School District 196 Apple Valley Transportation Hub EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The objectives of this study are to estimate potential noise and air quality impacts on the adjacent residential neighborhood from school bus activity at the new facility. Predicted sound levels are compared the state noise standards for residential land use and with existing ambient sound levels. Air pollutant concentrations are compared with state ambient air quality standards. Ambient sound levels were measured at two sites near the residential neighborhood immediately north of the proposed facility to establish an existing background level, and bus sound levels were monitored at the Eden Prairie transportation facility to confirm a data base from previous studies of school bus activity. Future noise levels from the proposed facility were modeled with the MinnNoise traffic noise model assuming 66 buses entering the facility on the south from 147 Street and 18 buses from the west from Johnny Cake Road. It is assumed that all 84 buses will enter the site and park in the garage in a one -hour period between 3:30 and 4:30 pm. Predicted levels at the nearest residences are below the state daytime noise standards which are applicable ion this period. Future noise levels are expected to exceed the existing ambient level and a 12 -foot fences along the north property is recommended to minimize these levels. Diesel school bus air emissions were based upon data from the US EPA and used in a traffic dispersion model assuming 84 school buses within a one -hour period. Predicted concentrations of air pollutants are expected to be well below the state ambient air quality standards. David Braslau Associates, Inc. Noise Consultant Reports 21 of 46 Independent School District 196 Apple Valley Transportation Hub Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Study Description 1 1.2. Study Objectives 1 1.3. Project Description 2 2.0 NOISE ASSESSMENT 4 2.1. Ambient Noise Monitoring 4 2.2. Bus Activity Noise Monitoring 4 2.3. Bus Noise Modeling 4 2.4. Noise Mitigation 5 3.0 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT 21 3.1. Diesel School Bus Emissions 21 3.2. Air Concentration Modeling 21 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 23 David Braslau Associates, Inc. Noise Consultant Reports 22 of 46 Independent School District 196 Apple Valley Transportation Hub Figure 1.1 Proposed Site and Adjacent Residential Area 3 Figure 2.1 Photograph of East Monitoring Site 6 Figure 2.2 Photo of West Monitoring Site 7 Figure 2.3 East Monitoring Site Sound Level Time History (dBA) 8 Figure 2.4 West Monitoring Site Time History (dBA) 9 Figure 2.5 East and West Monitoring Time Histories Compared 10 Figure 2.6 Time History Excerpt from West Monitoring Site 11 Figure 2.7 East Monitoring Site Statistical Sound Level Time History 12 Figure 2.8 West Monitoring Site Statistical Level Time History 13 Figure 2.9 MSP Arrival Flight Tracks — 4 pm on April 29, 2015 14 Figure 2.10 MSP Arrival and Departure Flights Tracks — 4 pm on May 7, 2015 15 Figure 2.11 Aerial Photo of Eden Prairie Transportation Hub 16 Figure 2.12 Monitored Passby Time Histories of Entering Buses 17 Figure 2.13 Noise Model Geometry 18 Figure 2.14 Predicted L10 Levels from South and West Approaches 19 Figure 2.15 Predicted L10 Levels with a 12 ft Fence 20 Table 1.1 State Noise Standards 1 Table 1.2 State Ambient Air Quality Standards for Selected Pollutants 2 Table 3.1 Assumed Diesel School Bus Emissions 21 Table 3.2 Predicted Pollutant Concentrations and Standards 22 David Braslau Associates, Inc. List of Figures List of Tables Noise Consultant Reports 23 of 46 Oise Area Classification b aytime L50 L10 1Nighttime L50 L10 Oise Metric 1 NAC-1 (residential and sensitive areas) 60 65 50 55 AC -2 (commercial ) 65 70 65 70 AC -3 (industrial) 75 80 75 80 Independent School District 196 Apple Valley Transportation Hub 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1. Study Description This Noise and Air Quality Assessment Report presents results of noise monitoring and noise and air quality modeling of potential impacts from the proposed Apple Valley Transportation Hub on adjacent residential properties. Location of the proposed new facility relative to adjacent land uses is shown on the aerial photo in Figure 1.1. This assessment is based upon ambient sound level monitoring near the closest residential area, sound level monitoring of school bus activity at the existing Eden Prairie Transportation Hub, and noise and air quality modeling of bus movement at the new facility. 1.2. Study Objectives The objectives of the study are to estimate potential noise and air quality impacts on the adjacent residential neighborhood from school bus activity at the new facility. Compliance of future sound levels with the Minnesota state noise standard and with state ambient air quality standards will be established. Predicted sound levels are compared with existing ambient sound levels to determine the potential increase in sound level. Mitigation is considered where levels exceed state noise standards or are significantly above the ambient level. The state noise standards are summarized in Table 1.1. Table 1.1 State Noise Standards The L50 refers to levels that occur more than 50% of an hour while the L10 refers to levels that occur more than 10% of an hour. The daytime period includes hours between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm. The nighttime period includes hours between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. Table 1.2 summarizes the state ambient air quality standards most applicable to diesel school bus emissions. David Braslau Associates, Inc. Page 1 Noise Consultant Reports 24 of 46 Pollutant Period Standard Units CO Hour' 30 Parts per million (ppp) 8 -hour 9 Parts per million (ppp) NO2 Annual 0.05 Parts per million (ppp) PM10 24 -hour 150 Micrograms per cubic meter Annual 50 Micrograms per cubic meter PM2.5 24 -hour 65 Micrograms per cubic meter Annual 15 Micrograms per cubic meter Independent School District 196 Apple Valley Transportation Hub Table 1.2 State Ambient Air Quality Standards for Selected Pollutants 1.3. Project Description Access to the bus garage is from 147 Street on the south and Johnny Cake Road on the west. Most of the buses are likely to use the south entrance because of their destinations. This assessment assumes that 66 buses arrive using the south approach and 18 buses arrive using the west approach for a total of 84 buses in the afternoon within the period of one hour between 3:30 and 430 pm. These will travel along the roadway just south of the residential area to access the bus garage from the north. This is considered to be the worst case scenario since buses in the morning will depart from the bus garage to the south, away from the residential area. Other activities on the hub property such as washing buses will take place south of the garage. David Braslau Associates, Inc. Page 2 Noise Consultant Reports 25 of 46 NY3 WNW AIN° SEMI 1H1 AYM T1VONN JyLiJ L bJ cr) t 0 C 0 Independent School District 196 Apple Valley Transportation Hub 2.0 NOISE ASSESSMENT 2.1. Ambient Noise Monitoring Ambient sound level measurements were taken on Wednesday afternoon April 29, 2015 between 3:30 and 5:30 pm to include the 3:30 to 4:40 pm period when buses are expected to return to the garage in the afternoon. Location of the two monitoring sites are shown with red dots on Figure.1.1. Photographs of the two sites, labeled the East Site and West Site, are shown on Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2. The second by second time level history (dBA or A- weighted decibels) at the East Site is shown on Figure 2.3, for the West Site on Figure 2.4 and time histories for both sites are shown for comparison on Figure 2.5. The numerous peaks on these figures are aircraft over - flights on approach for Runway 17 at MSP. Figure 2.6 is an enlarged excerpt from the time history at the west monitor showing two approaches close together. The ambient level for this period without aircraft overflights is seen to vary between about 40 and 42 dBA. Statistical levels for these sites are presented in Figure 2.7 (East) and Figure 2.8 (West). At the East site, where traffic has less influence on the sound level, the ambient level or L90 (without intermittent sound such as aircraft) varies from 38 to 40 dBA in the 3:30 to 3:40 time period. At the West side, which is closer to Johnny Cake Road, the L90 varies from 40 to 43 dBA Flight racks for April 29 at 4 pm are shown on Figure 2.9 and the heavily used approach Runway 17 is clearly seen. However, flight tracks for May 7 at 4 pm, for example, show essentially no flight tracks near the study area (Figure 2.10). Therefore, the ambient sound level that was observed on April 29 when no aircraft overflights were occurring will be used as the ambient sound level for comparison with noise from the proposed bus facility. 2.2. Bus Activity Noise Monitoring Extensive sound level monitoring had been performed for another bus facility in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area and a typical sound level source at 50 feet for modeling bus activity noise was already developed. However, to confirm this level, sound level monitoring of returning school buses was performed at the District 196 transportation facility in Eden Prairie. Readings were taken on Friday April 17. 2015. Location of the monitoring site in Eden Prairie is shown on Figure 2.11 to capture the maximum passby sound level and not the overall hourly sound level at this point. Representative passby time histories are shown on Figure 2.12. The maximum levels, adjusted to a distance of 50 feet, were within 1 dB of previously established source data. Therefore, data from the more extensive previous study was confirmed. 2.3. Bus Noise Modeling The MinnNoise traffic model was used to estimate sound levels at the eleven closest homes north of the proposed facility. Approach paths from the south and west assumed in the model are shown on Figure 2.13. A speed of 15 mph was assumed along the dotted path. This path effectively represents movement of the buses to the garage entrance where the sound level will be low relative to the moving and passby levels. David Braslau Associates, Inc. Page 4 Noise Consultant Reports 27 of 46 Independent School District 196 Apple Valley Transportation Hub It has been assumed that 66 buses approach the garage from the south approach and 18 from the west approach and that these buses fill the first available spaces. Since an hour -long interval is being evaluated and six buses will be entering each of the 14 doors during the hour, the exact sequence how this takes place does not appear to be critical. Predicted levels for the South and West approaches are presented in Figure 2.14 and compared with the state L10 daytime noise standard and an average monitored ambient value of 42 dBA. 2.4. Noise Mitigation While predicted sound levels from the buses are well below the daytime L10 standard, it can be seen from Figure 2.14 that predicted worst case levels could exceed the ambient level by significant amounts. As a noise mitigation measure, a 12 foot fence along the property line was evaluated. The resulting bus sound levels are compared with the ambient level in Figure 2.15 and seen to exceed the ambient at some locations by up to 10 dBA. It should be noted here that this level will only occur for one hour in the afternoon since buses will depart to the south in the morning hours. By comparison, it can be seen from Figure 2.6 and Figure 2.8 that the L10 from aircraft can be over 50 dBA for more than one hour when there are operations in this area. As an additional mitigation measure, the garage doors on the north side will be closed until the majority of buses have left in the morning. Other measures that will minimize sound levels at the adjacent residences are keeping the doors closed in the morning when buses depart and avoiding the use of backup alarms. David Braslau Associates, Inc. Page 5 Noise Consultant Reports 28 of 46 co t 0 a O CY co co C O 0 O) 0 N cu cn 'o Z N t 0 Q a) CC C ct) (0 = a— N O C 0 0 U M a) 'o Z (veP) lanai LZ :ZZ :L 6V6 L:L L :LICE S5L1:L1 L L :60: L 6£ :90: L L 0:170:Z L £Z: LOLL 917 :8S :91 L0:99 :91 6Z: £S :9 l LS :O9 :9l £ 1 :817 :91 SC: :91 LS:Zb:91 6 L:Oi7:91 117:L£ :91 £O :S£ :9l SZ :Z£ :9l LI :6Z :91 60 :LZ :91 l£ :17Z :91 �. £S: 2:91- L:61:91 L£ :9191 6S:£ 191 Z: L L :91 £j :9O:91 5O :90 :9 L LZ :CO :91 6:00:91 14:99:9 L ££ :SS :S L SS :ZSS 1 L L:09:91- 6£: L17: S l L 0 :917 :9 l £Z :Z17:S 1 St7:6£: S L LO :L£ :S L 6Z :tC:Sl LS: l£ :S £L 6ZSl 9£ :9Z :9 L bk t 0 C ca o 0 U or) cu 0 Z c c Lit) l f) ..a- (Sp) lanai cp .q. M M 8£ :O :L l l 1 :81:L l L1:£1.11- 09:01-:L l £Z :80 :L 1 99 :90:L 1 6Z :£O:L l 0: 10:L l S£ :89 :91 80 :9S:91 ltr :£5:91 •171: 1.9:91. 1.17:8•17:91 OZ :917:91 £S: CP:91 9Z: 117:91 6S :8£:91. Z£ :9£:91 SO:VC :91 8£ :1 £:9 l 11-:63:91. fitj:9Z:91 L 1.:17g:9 OS: [Z:9 l £Z :6l:9l 99 :91:91 6Z:171:9 l ZO :Z 1.:9 I- 9£ :60:91 80:L0:9 l 14 :10.91 17 L Z0 :91 L17:69 :9 l O:LS:S l £S:PS:S l 9Z :Z9 :91 69:6i':S l £ :Lp:S l SO:SV:S I 8£ :•7:SI l 1 :Ot7 :S l tr17:L£ :9 1 L l :S£ :S L OS :Z£ :S l a) E H t 0 0 a) w c (13 co ,t 0„... 0 O c 0 N U M 1) 0 Z Lc) (c) O tr) (Yap) lanai Lr) L() 0 0) N- 00 00 LC) C) C\i I— co t 0 0 cu C CO co co 0 0 0) 0 C') cn 0 •■■■■=11.■ • • co co (V 8 P) IaAel LO co 0) co (C) (0 E I— ■=. (C) 0 a.) C 0 0 V) 0) -J --I __I _J _J __I Ha f 0 IC) 0 V) 0 L() N. co co L() to 'Tr (yap) XX1 0 el cp co r- Lii (Ni o -- co co Ii = bk .... .T.4 CN1 ,--4 4) b.IJ al ao U) t o o_ a) Ce c (0 ...., , = 4 _ u) 0 c 0 U, 0 (,) a) U) 0 Z ---- o 0 0 Lo 0) Lt s s 51) —I _I —1 —1 _I --1 } C to o Ln o N- to to Lc) to ( e p) xxl LO 0 Nt LO CO I:. 1" CD ,--- C C c,6 ,- co t o 0. cu W E co op — , = 4 ._ c oo o 0 (0 0' a) 0) '5 z uut 34.07'0 tr, q. Ui DANJ pr, • Ui Ui LAVOIGO CT FLORAL CT 13 < cC 0 3- r. cimaus 3."Iv' A 3 ()Kt 0 CEDAR. 13 L ,N33d0 3 v.) ,. c. V- i; 6''''' , t.'0. I '''' IVEyw, 'Z- -- 4. .1,) Id 0 d N3P.V 0 D Cl SW 0 O a C D ^4= 3A,V 3 iinv M3 s 17, fv lk' 3'4 `ly 3 DNI S3 XVII , , , M 3AV id A' /013 3'.V V6 31 \ A s SVi 08 2f 3 ST WE tf, 3 titAr aAv d witIERS 1GTON P C16 03V 81:) In Cd COOP Hicgi 13 A66310430 RRIGAN (31 CIN[ PILOT 10,10B RD RAV 003d0 Hon() 4a I . BAP El ; RL z 0 Cr: ru ce: w fr $r.irhtliV r Avg_ g srr p n C') C.0 1.1.1 3 D.N)Bt 1 7 I L4 T FLORAL CT - 073 0 0 xf,) AT, Q 4. 1351H '.;1 Cl F- 1,5 >. 1. .92 O.. = C ED AP..;v1: ,S 13 A, WlqiNVO eis 1 , o Cl MV 1 >WO Cl Wei 0 HZ.I.V.N39'd 0 31\',1 CVV F- F- rti d tN13 0 3AV ONINdflO 3.,V 1 jv ; S3 A:VH 3/W Go 04. 4(4„:„ a 3 3 N 01S3 d 3 ift otRe - R M 3V InA M3 1A_LE;ii 3",t U 3.AV S SVt s3.1vIs5 Cd 1ON) 10 PATh 0 LIAO E AVE II 13 A ti3 Vdt3 C COPRIGAN Cl UI a f- V, I /- tc, k7 3: c,:j4 3,\V 8VO: -e .-- . , c c'e.I. 17 VW 430NN3d ..-, ( i ;k i;"\OC`" Ei 0 L- W eiVil OA IS 1.11 \6\'' ' ''..7,. , #1 .:.1 T ti a "r 0 i Si ' ._ e•I p L 1. = tt HI , a _92 (-5 dl fit OT r,'NO6 RD -3V I P71 S C( SS3H3(10 10 H.199 i 3AV N3053;d0 % a t Or" BAP E •ewit :: 1.11 t 0 0 a) Et E as co , a- = ,_ 0 0 0) a) 0 Z CO N- CV) CO U) CO C ^' N N 0 0 CD 0 0 N I I N- LO A CO y am , ` ^ A W 0 0 0 0 C 0) 0, iii O •° N M d' to CO N ^ ^ p ^'� „` W W W N 0) 0)0,0,0, (v9P) bail to to N CO Q) N CO N M N O N N CO CO LO N to N CY) CY) W N LO N N O) CO M O N U) t 0 NN CD 1.1. 0 0 O 0' 0 0 Z E 0 0 oo I CO Lc) I IP co U LU I 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 'I' C\I LIMN 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 00 0 - 0 (0 o - o 0 - 0 C\1 0 t 0 (I) CC CO C (0 4 _ 0 a) 0 Nr 0 LO (0 (yaP) o Lll N O O T U) a) Y/ ^ U) CC LL co CC LL N W cC co cC N L) U) a) U) N Cr M U) N cc N U) N Cr T U) N cc L to ' m N Cf U. N- ct) L mott co (ve P) o n N O 0 U) Q a. C a) C co to O c 0 co ^ 0 '4 W 0) . Z Pollutant Urban Diesel Buses School Diesel Buses School Gasoline Buses voC 0.349 0.642 7.580 THC 0.353 0.653 7.791 CO 3.376 2.312 89.600 NOx 14.793 10.536 7.477 PM . _0274 0.556 0.104 PM. c 0.297 0.604 0.145 Independent School District 196 Apple Valley Transportation Hub 3.0 AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT 3.1. Diesel School Bus Emissions Diesel bus emissions are taken from the US EPA Emission Fact Sheet "Average In -Use Emissions from Urban Buses and School Buses" EPA420 -F -08 -026, October 2008. These emissions are shown in Table 3.1. Table 3.1 Assumed Diesel School Bus Emissions (Average emission rates in grams per mile) These values are for the year 2008. Significant improvements have been made in diesel emissions since then so that the results here are likely to be very conservative. 3.2. Air Concentration Modeling The CAL3QHC traffic dispersion model has been used to estimate concentrations for gaseous pollutants. An atmospheric stability class D has been assumed which is likely to occur under low wind conditions in the afternoon. A low wind speed of one meter /sec (2.2 mph) has been assumed from the south for worst case concentrations at the nearest homes. A "traffic flow" of 84 buses at 15 mph has been assumed north of the bus garage. Particulate matter emissions (PM 10 and PM 2.5 particle size less than 10 microns and 2.5 microns) have been estimated at a typical home 130 feet from the traveling buses using a simple point- source atmospheric dispersion mode. The "source" consisted or 84 buses in a one hour period each with an emission rate of .0023 gram/sec for PM 2.5 and 0.0025 gram/sec for PM 10. Resulting concentrations compared with the most stringent Minnesota air quality standards are presented in Table 3.2. David Braslau Associates, Inc. Page 21 Noise Consultant Reports 44 of 46 Independent School District 196 Table 3.2 Predicted Pollutant Concentrations and Standards Apple Valley Transportation Hub Mimimum Standards CO 8 hours NO2 annual PM2.5 24 annual PM1Oennue] 9.000 0.050 15.000 50.000 From the table, it can be seen tha the expected pollutant concentrations from the peak hour for arriving buses is well below the most stringent standards for these pollutants. Observation of returning school bus activity at the Eden Prairie garage showed that bus engines are turned off immediately after parking so that idle emissions do not significantly contribute to total concentrations. David Braslau Associates, Inc. Page 22 Noise Consultan Reports 45 of 46 VOC THC CO NO x PM25 PM1O ppm ppm ppm ppm Ug/m3 Ug/m3 1 hr 1 hr 1 hr 1 hr 24 hr 24 hr Homel 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.010 0.180 0.210 Home2 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.010 0.180 0.210 Home3 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.010 0.190 0.210 Home4 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.010 0.190 0.210 Home5 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.010 0.180 0.210 Home6 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.009 0.190 0.210 Home7 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.010 0.190 0.210 Home8 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.009 0.190 0.210 Home9 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.010 0.190 0.210 Horna1O 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.007 0.133 0.147 Home 11 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.005 0.095 0.105 Independent School District 196 Table 3.2 Predicted Pollutant Concentrations and Standards Apple Valley Transportation Hub Mimimum Standards CO 8 hours NO2 annual PM2.5 24 annual PM1Oennue] 9.000 0.050 15.000 50.000 From the table, it can be seen tha the expected pollutant concentrations from the peak hour for arriving buses is well below the most stringent standards for these pollutants. Observation of returning school bus activity at the Eden Prairie garage showed that bus engines are turned off immediately after parking so that idle emissions do not significantly contribute to total concentrations. David Braslau Associates, Inc. Page 22 Noise Consultan Reports 45 of 46 Independent School District 196 Apple Valley Transportation Hub 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon this noise and air quality assessment of the proposed bus transportation facility in Apple Valley, the greatest impacts from noise are likely to occur in the mid- afternoon period when all of the buses return to the garage and enter from the north. Some other sounds may be associated with normal activities such as bus departures and bus washing, although these will be mostly shielded by the garage. With garage doors open during the day, some of these sounds may be heard but will be lower than those associated with bus movement closest to the residential area. No significant air quality impacts are expected to be associated with the facility, with estimated levels well below state standards. Mitigation of noise with a fence along the north property line and maintaining closed garage doors when most buses depart in the morning will minimize noise impacts on the adjacent residential neighborhood. y: \jobs\2015jobs\ 21501$ \applevalley = transporthub- report-ver0l .doc David Braslau Associates, Inc. Page 23 Noise Consultant Reports 46 of 46 Traffic Impact Study for ISD 196 Transportation Hub in Apple Valley, MN Prepared for: ISD 196 yov WENCK ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 1 of 48 WENCK File #3171 -02 May 8, 2015 3455 153 Street W Rosemount, MN 55068 Prepared by: WENCK Associates, Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 7963 - 479 -4200 Fax: 763- 479 -4242 Table of Contents 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 -1 2.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND 2 -1 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 -1 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS 4 -1 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 5 -1 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 -1 7.0 APPENDIX 7 -1 FIGURES FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION 2 -2 FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN 2 -3 FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 -2 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES 4 -3 FIGURE 5 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES 4 -4 May 8, 2015 i Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 2 of 48 y ® WENCK - ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of a proposed new transportation hub facility for Independent School District (ISD) 196 located in Apple Valley, MN. The project site is located in the northeast corner of the Johnny Cake Ridge Road /147 Street. The proposed project location is currently vacant. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • Johnny Cake Ridge Road /147 Street • 147 Street /Evendale Way • 147 Street /proposed access • Johnny Cake Ridge Road /proposed access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project will involve constructing a new 66,700 square foot building to house office space, maintenance bays, and bus storage. The project includes approximately 152 on -site parking spaces. As shown in the site plan, the project includes access points on 147 Street, Johnny Cake Ridge Road, and Evendale Way. The access on Johnny Cake Ridge Road will be limited to right in /right out only, while the access on both 147 Street and Evendale Way will be full movement. The project is expected to be completed by the end of 2016. The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed project is expected to generate 132 trips during the 600 -700 a.m. hour, 53 trip during the 700 -800 a.m. hour, 108 trips during the 900 -1000 a.m. hour, 88 trips during the 200 -300 p.m. hour, 189 trips during the 400 -500 p.m. hour, and 5 trips during 500 -600 p.m. hour. • The project includes access points on 147 Street, Johnny Cake Ridge Road, and Evendale Way. The access on Johnny Cake Ridge Road will be limited to right in /right out only, while the access on both 147 Street and Evendale Way will be full movement. • All intersections operate at acceptable levels of service during all time periods under all 2015 and 2017 scenarios. • The surrounding roadway system has adequate capacity to accommodate both existing and future forecasted traffic volumes during all time periods. As shown in the intersection operations analysis, trips generated by the proposed development have minimal impact on traffic operations at nearby intersections. Therefore, no mitigation measures are needed to accommodate the proposed project. May 8, 2015 1. - 1_ Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 3 of 48 W WENCK ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. • Trips generated by the proposed facility are spread out over multiple hours during both the a.m. and p.m. periods. This unique trip generation characteristic helps to minimize the impact of the project during any one particular time period. In addition, bus route start and end times vary during each hour, resulting in bus trips spread out and not concentrated during short time frames. • Under existing conditions, the surrounding street traffic peaks during the 700 -800 a.m. and 500 -600 p.m. hours. The proposed facility experiences peak trip generation from 600 -700 a.m. and 400 -500 p.m., which is offset from the surrounding street system peak. This offset helps to minimize the impact of the proposed facility during the peak traffic periods. • The provision of multiple access points for the project eliminates congestion at any one location and provides the most direct entry and exit location for each bus route. This reduces the likelihood of additional trips on the surrounding roadway network. • The roadways in this area are adequately designed to accommodate bus traffic. Turn lanes, lane widths, and intersection corner radii are adequate for both existing traffic and future bus maneuvers. May 8, 2015 1 -2 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 4 of 48 v^� WENGK innmin Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic Impact Study is to evaluate the traffic impacts of a proposed new transportation hub facility for Independent School District (ISD) 196 located in Apple Valley, MN. The project site is located in the northeast corner of the Johnny Cake Ridge Road /147 Street. The proposed project location is currently vacant. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • Johnny Cake Ridge Road /147 Street • 147 Street /Evendale Way • 147 Street /proposed access • Johnny Cake Ridge Road /proposed access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project will involve constructing a new 66,700 square foot building to house office space, maintenance bays, and bus storage. The project includes approximately 152 on -site parking spaces. The current site plan is shown in Figure 2. As shown in the site plan, the project includes access points on 147 Street, Johnny Cake Ridge Road, and Evendale Way. The access on Johnny Cake Ridge Road will be limited to right in /right out only, while the access on both 147 Street and Evendale Way will be full movement. The project is expected to be completed by the end of 2016. May 8, 2015 2 -1 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 5 of 48 y y WENCK - ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. 0 • 7, 135th G 4:71€P AVE. ' h 15.2nd FLORECE ST.f c L010 POP. 38. EMERALD WAY 47. EMERALD PATH 57. LOWER ENDICOTT *L 68. ENDICOT T *AY 29. FREEPORT Cl. ci 3L FO)CTAIL CT, CT. b9. FELD5PAR LN 127. EMPIRE . 70. UPPER GUTHRIE CT. 138. HERITAGE LN, 71. LOWER GUTHRIE CT. 139. 142na ST. j 140. 142nd ST. 141. HIBISCUS CT. 5" 142. HID ORY CT. 143,1 143. HICLORY WA/ 145. HUNTINGTON CIR. 146. ESSEX CT. 144th iT UFiF 150T• SN R2OW F_OR1S E R TT. CT, 139th • MIEN CT. ND :D. 9j10 6f5 T S . P20. rpT ont. C 136th AL GEiF 31$ EL04.0 • CT. 0E\ Tp. • ST. 23 APPROXIMATE SCALE 2300' FROs7 POITV• T railer Court v WENCK Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. 37. GARRETT LN. 144. HAMBURG CT. 140. HUNTINGTON DR. 148. GLEPOBROOJ WA, . . 98. OSAGE PT. 109. H1RTA PT. 99. 50OOWBELL PT. 110. LISTA PT. 100. HIDDEN PT. 111. HORT EN PT. 101. GRENADA PT. 112. STAVEPN PT. 10?.. MAP+ HAM PT. 113. 11 10 PT. 103. THRUSH Pi. 114. HAL OE N CIR. F 0 .IAGF 150. GENESEE AVE. 151. GREENTREE CT. 152. GERANIUM CT. 153. GEORGE CT. 154. CAVOTTE CT. 155. GENESEE CT. 156. GERD1NE CT. 157. GRANDER CT. 158. GALLUP CT. 159. GAVOT TE AVE. 160. LOWER 127th ST. W. Mlnnesota zoologicol Gardens F t °RV:4 IN . 114. GALVESTON AVE. 116. LOWER FJORD NA) 118. FINESSE WO, 122. UPPER FJORD *At 124. GARDEN GATE CIR. 125. GOOSEBERRY WAI 126. ;1RTREE UV. 133. F1040H LN. 135. F100000 DR. 130. I IRF THORN 04. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR ISD 196 TRANSPORTATION HUB IN APPLE VALLEY, MN Wenk Traffic lmpact Study May 8, 2015 SHLRWO:, C7, 193. 040L001 0000 00. 194. EAGLEWOOD LN. 095. DUCK, CROSSING WAY 196. DUCK TRAIL L.N. 197. DUNBERRi WAY 198. DLINCAN PATH 199. DUCK POND 1114r 20C. EARL Y BIRO CIR. 201. EAGLES N051 WAY 202. EASTBROOK 14. ./1 01! 12701 0230 33134 i ISN 0200 1'4 13 112 71144 020*, 00 PROJECT LOCATION 73. UPPER 1411 74, DURHAM CT . CORRIGAN 72. 76. °WOOD 010 FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION 11 II 1 ; li !• !! ,. 1 1 offal 1 HSVM SIM EllIcTEXIMECI '46 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 7 of 48 e0-60. V Z 4 41 1 = 1 . 1 . Csi D w • co O Z 2 f_ co 0 w 0 - wow ooa. Er LL. C./) Z < g z • 1-- Johnny Cake Ridge Road /147 Street (all -way stop sign control) 147 Street /Evendale Way (minor street stop sign control) 147 Street • ro • osed access minor street sto • si • n control Traffic Volume Data May 8, 2015 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 8 of 48 3.0 Existing Conditions The proposed site is currently vacant. The site is bounded by Johnny Cake Ridge Road on the west, 147 Street on the south, Evendale Way on the east, and residential uses to the north. Near the site location, Johnny Cake Ridge Road is a four lane undivided roadway with turn lanes at major intersections. 147 Street is a three lane undivided roadway with turn lanes at major intersections. Evendale Way is a two lane cul -de -sac that extends north of 147 Street. Existing conditions at intersections near the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with stop signs on all approaches. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one left turn /through lane and one through /right turn lane. This intersection has four approaches and is controlled with stop signs on the minor street approaches. The eastbound and westbound approaches provide one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The northbound and southbound approaches provide one left turn /through /right turn lane. This intersection has three approaches and is controlled with a stop sign on the proposed southbound access approach. The eastbound approach provides one left turn lane and one through /right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one through /right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn /through /right turn lane. Johnny Cake Ridge Road /proposed access (minor street stop sign control) This intersection has three approaches and is controlled with a stop sign on the proposed westbound access approach. The access at this location is limited to right in /right out movements. The northbound approach provides one through lane and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one through lane. The westbound approach provides one right turn lane. Turn movement volumes were recorded at each intersection from 6:00 - 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 - 6:00 p.m. in April, 2015. v v WENCK ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. '06 3901b 3>iVO ANN1-191 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 9 of 48 cc r 1 of) w 0 E s Z " a E ›- co 0 Z ct) 0) 0 W 4 tt < < CL F > 2 - —ct 0 0 CL eL L.L. CO Q. LL Z < 1— l"" Trip Type 600 -700 AM 700 -800 AM 900 -1000 AM In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Employee 76 0 76 26 0 26 0 52 52 Bus 0 56 56 0 27 27 56 0 56 Trip Type 200 -300 PM 400 -500 PM 500 -600 PM In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Employee 37 0 37 0 105 105 0 0 0 Bus 0 51 51 83 1 84 0 5 5 Traffic Forecast Scenarios To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the year 2017, which is one year after the expected completion of the transportation hub. Specifically, traffic forecasts during the weekday a.m. and p.m. hours of 600 -700 a.m., 700 -800 a.m., 900 -1000 a.m., 200 -300 p.m., 400 -500 p.m., and 500 -600 p.m. were completed for the following scenarios: • 2015 Existing. Turn movement volumes collected in April 2015 were used for existing conditions. The existing volume information includes trips generated by uses near the project site. • 2017 No Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased at a rate of two percent per year to account for background growth generated by other development within the immediate area. • 2017 Build. Trips generated by the proposed use and were added to the 2017 No- Build volumes to determine 2017 Build volumes. Trip Generation 4.0 Traffic Forecasts The expected development trips were determined from detailed bus route and on -site employee information provided by the project owner. The proposed use will generate employee trips and bus trips. Employee trips include employees entering and exiting before and after each work shift as well as other trips that occur during a typical weekday. Bus trips include all trips made by buses in and out of the site. Bus driver employees enter the site in their personal vehicle, exit the site in a bus to complete a route, return to the site in a bus, and exit the site in their personal vehicle. The trip generation also includes charter bus trips that occur later in the afternoon. Trip generation information for employee and bus trips are both presented in Table 4 - 1. May 8, 2015 Table 4 -1: Weekday Trip Generation for Proposed Land Use 4 -1 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 10 of 48 W WENCK ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. Traffic Volumes Employees and bus trips were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the detailed routing information provided by the owner. Traffic volumes were established during the 600 -700 a.m., 700 -800 a.m., 900 -1000 a.m., 200 -300 p.m., 400 -500 p.m., and 500 -600 p.m. hours for the following forecasting scenarios: • 2015 existing • 2017 No-Build • 2017 Build The resultant traffic volumes are presented in Figures 4 and 5. May 8, 2015 4 -2 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 11 of 48 y `► WENCK - ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. r � r r w v im ° >- w z C� z o 411 13/14/23 — 26/27/35 -> 16/17/17 N cD c►) A 1 w <0 zc ZO 0 cx) c oo V--"" CQr 68171/71 — 54/56/56 --> 32/33/33 N 0 4 w U >- w Z0 zo P, N '�- co r4 it) (0 N cv in j J,L* 25/26/26 --t 48/50/51 — 24/25/25 �- -1 -123 tr N CO C r � N 03 - 19/20/20 47/49/50 8/8/29 '�- -/ -/1 T r' o It) 0 1) - 41/43/43 4— 97/101/101 - 28/29/38 ntr> �rn � N -/ -/0 tr> 0) c0 it) Q) It') - 18/19/19 E — 73/76/87 �..._. 23/24/27 �Tf RIGHT TURN ACCESS PROJECT LOCATION RIGHT TURN ACCESS PROJECT LOCATION RIGHT TURN ACCESS PROJECT LOCATION i vov WENCK Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. N CO 441 0 58/60/60— * cri Ei L 170/177/177— * 6 -7 AM V' co Cr) /- /12 -t 131/136/136 --> w v 7 -8 AM 2015 2017 NO -BUILD 2017 BUILD -1 -150 E-- 74/77/77 t--/-/25 ,x. 166/173/173 9-IOAM �-- -/ -/18 114/119/119 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR ISD 196 TRANSPORTATION HUB IN APPLE VALLEY, MN V VCi IR 11 C1111C, III I JJQLI J IUUy IVIQy 0, L(J 1 J 12 of 48 147TH ST 147TH ST 147TH ST Lo o C LT) 0 N L I 1 L> 7/7/7_ 51/53/59—* 0/0/0 ..__, M co 00 M Q O 13/14/14 157/163/167 0/0/0 --, N0 r-- t�1 ao 414 5/5/5 126/131 /169- 3 0/0/0 #t— 0/0/0 E — 69/72/122 v- 0 /0 /0 o0 > Ooo tY ©00 e O 9/9/9 E- 163/170/195 s - 0 /0 /0 Ere 0 00 00 2!2/20 E— 112/117/135 _... 0/0/0 *Or w 000 O 00O N t FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY A.M. PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES c) 0)) - <-11 89/93/97 --� 104/108/112 —3 30/31/31 p N p V O w V0 Z (a Z ❑ 0 N � co N co FP. co ‹i t 0 89/93/93 —t 123/128/130 62/65/65 T 0) w U CC Z CI TFe N ° 0 -50 c�) tk 53 3. oo 4 _ 1 . 4 95/99/99 —3' 122/127/127 ---3 82/85/85 tr �-- -1 -10 T N N N • om,. co 0 84/87/87 E-- 100/104/121 36/37/50 -1 -11 RIGHT TURN ACCESS C.)141 N ; Cr) PROJECT LOCATION 36/37/37 4— 70/73/81 29/30/50 sr RIGHT TURN ACCESS PROJECT LOCATION r> RIGHT TURN ACCESS 0 M M PROJECT LOCATION f' - 59/61/61 f--- 77/80/81 - 24/25/27 vow WENCK Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. ,----- XX/XX/X CO N Q) i L 151/157/157—* N -/- 126 178/185/185 --) c', r 231/240/240— > > 2-3 PM 13 of 48 4 -5 PM W U w U 2015 2017 NO -BUILD 2017 BUILD -1 -127 E-- 135/140/140 -1 -118 *— 220/229/229 5 -6 PM � - -1 -10 160/166/166 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR ISD 196 TRANSPORTATION HUB IN APPLE VALLEY, MN 147TH ST 147TH ST 147TH ST C O G7 N • Q3 0 C) 16/17/17 -1 134/139/148 --> 0/0/0 00 005p 00(0 3/3/3 175/182/259 —' 0 /0 /0 0 0 N 0 0 N 0o c� +LH+ 0/0/0 — ' 231/240/241—> 0 /0 /0 W w w 0 it " 3/3/3 115/120/147 - 12/12/12 12/12/12 t 1 o #t - _ - 2/2/19 4— 214/223/241 0 /0 /0 00 > 000 0 000 0 /0 /0 E - 160/166/166 0/0/0 Ql I I 00 00 N FIGURE 5 WEEKDAY P.M. PEAK HOUR TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES Intersection Level of Service Analysis 5.0 Traffic Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro software. Initial analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: • Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or Tess. • Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. • Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service D corresponds to high- density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. • Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop- and -go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. May 8, 2015 5 ®1 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 14 of 48 � WENCK VAV ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. The LOS results for the study intersections are described below. Johnny Cake Ridge Road /147 Street (all -way stop sign control) During the weekday a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS B or better under all scenarios. During the weekday p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS C or better under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS C or better under all scenarios. 147 Street /Evendale Way (minor street stop sign control) During the weekday a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios. During the weekday p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A or better under all scenarios. 147 Street /proposed access (minor street stop sign control) During the weekday a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios. During the weekday p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS B or better under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A or better under all scenarios. Johnny Cake Ridge Road /proposed access (minor street stop sign control) During the weekday a.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios. During the weekday p.m. peak period, all movements operate at LOS A under all scenarios. The overall intersection operates at LOS A under all scenarios. Overall Traffic Impacts The surrounding roadway system has adequate capacity to accommodate both existing and future forecasted traffic volumes during all time periods. As shown in the intersection operations analysis, trips generated by the proposed development have minimal impact on traffic operations at nearby intersections. Therefore, no mitigation measures are needed to accommodate the proposed project. Trips generated by the proposed facility are spread out over multiple hours during both the a.m. and p.m. periods. This unique trip generation characteristic helps to minimize the impact of the project during any one particular time period. In addition, bus route start and end times vary during each hour, resulting in bus trips spread out and not concentrated during short time frames. Under existing conditions, the surrounding street traffic peaks during the 700 -800 a.m. and 500 -600 p.m. hours. The proposed facility experiences peak trip generation from 600 -700 a.m. and 400 -500 p.m., which is offset from the surrounding street system peak. This offset helps to minimize the impact of the proposed facility during the peak traffic periods. May 8, 2015 5 -2 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 15 of 48 WENCK VAV ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. The provision of multiple access points for the project eliminates congestion at any one location and provides the most direct entry and exit location for each bus route. This reduces the likelihood of additional trips on the surrounding roadway network. The roadways in this area are adequately designed to accommodate bus traffic. Turn lanes, lane widths, and intersection corner radii are adequate for both existing traffic and future bus maneuvers. May 8, 2015 5 -3 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 16 of 48 v yWENCK - ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. 6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed project is expected to generate 132 trips during the 600 -700 a.m. hour, 53 trip during the 700 -800 a.m. hour, 108 trips during the 900 -1000 a.m. hour, 88 trips during the 200 -300 p.m. hour, 189 trips during the 400 -500 p.m. hour, and 5 trips during 500 -600 p.m. hour. • The project includes access points on 147 Street, Johnny Cake Ridge Road, and Evendale Way. The access on Johnny Cake Ridge Road will be limited to right in /right out only, while the access on both 147 Street and Evendale Way will be full movement. • All intersections operate at acceptable levels of service during all time periods under all 2015 and 2017 scenarios. • The surrounding roadway system has adequate capacity to accommodate both existing and future forecasted traffic volumes during all time periods. As shown in the intersection operations analysis, trips generated by the proposed development have minimal impact on traffic operations at nearby intersections. Therefore, no mitigation measures are needed to accommodate the proposed project. • Trips generated by the proposed facility are spread out over multiple hours during both the a.m. and p.m. periods. This unique trip generation characteristic helps to minimize the impact of the project during any one particular time period. In addition, bus route start and end times vary during each hour, resulting in bus trips spread out and not concentrated during short time frames. • Under existing conditions, the surrounding street traffic peaks during the 700 -800 a.m. and 500 -600 p.m. hours. The proposed facility experiences peak trip generation from 600 -700 a.m. and 400 -500 p.m., which is offset from the surrounding street system peak. This offset helps to minimize the impact of the proposed facility during the peak traffic periods. • The provision of multiple access points for the project eliminates congestion at any one location and provides the most direct entry and exit location for each bus route. This reduces the likelihood of additional trips on the surrounding roadway network. • The roadways in this area are adequately designed to accommodate bus traffic. Turn lanes, lane widths, and intersection corner radii are adequate for both existing traffic and future bus maneuvers. May 8, 2015 6 -1. Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 17 of 48 v WENCK - ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. May 8, 2015 7 -1 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 18 of 48 7.0 Appendix viSv WENCK ASSOCIATES Responsive partner. Exceptional outcomes. HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnn Cake Rid .e Road & 147th St Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 9 Intersection LOS A Movement Vol, veh/h 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.83 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 Mvmt Flow 0 Number of Lanes 0 Approach Opposing Approach Opposing Lanes Conflicting Approach Left Conflicting Lanes Left Conflicting Approach Right Conflicting Lanes Right HCM Control Delay HCM LOS Lane Vol Left, % Vol Thru, % Vol Right, % Sign Control Traffic Vol by Lane LT Vol Through Vol RT Vol Lane Flow Rate Geometry Grp Degree of Util (X) Departure Headway (Hd) Convergence, Y/N Cap Service Time HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th-tile V:\ 7110212 7 B 6-7 am,syn EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR 23 0.83 2 28 1 EB WB 2 SO 2 NB 2 8.9 A NBLn1 23% 77% 0% Stop 101 23 78 0 122 7 0,181 5.358 'Yes 667 3.111 0.183 9.3 A 0.7 35 17 0.83 0.83 2 2 42 20 1 0 NBLn2 0% 87% 13% Stop 90 0 78 12 108 7 0.155 5.15 Yes 694 2.902 0.156 8.9 A 0,5 EBLni 100% 0% 0% Stop 23 23 0 0 28 7 0.047 6,111 Yes 584 3.873 0,048 9.2 A 0.1 0 29 50 20 0 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 2 2 2 2 2 0 35 60 24 0 0 1 1 0 0 EBLn2 67% 33% Stop 52 0 35 17 63 7 0.094 5.377 Yes 663 3.138 0.095 8.7 A 0.3 WB EB 2 NB 2 SB 2 9 A Wanl WBLn2 100% 0% 0% 71% 0% 29% Stop Stop 29 70 29 0 0 50 0 20 35 84 7 7 0.059 0.126 6.075 5.37 Yes Yes 588 665 3.833 3.128 0.06 0.126 9.2 8.9 A A 0.2 0.4 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 19 of 48 SBLn1 35% 65% 0% Stop 65 23 42 0 78 7 0.12 5,513 Yes 648 3.271 0,12 9 A 0.4 SBLn2 0% 79% 21% Stop 53 0 42 11 64 7 0.092 5.189 Yes 687 2,947 0.093 8.5 A 0.3 23 0.83 2 28 0 NB SB 2 EB 2 WB 2 9.1 A 5/8/2015 156 12 0.83 0.83 2 2 188 14 2 0 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnny Cake Ridge Road & 147th St In[e rsecon Intersection Delay, s veh Intersection LOS Movement Vol, vehth 0 Peak Hour Factor 0,83 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 Mvmt Flow 0 Number of Lanes '.. Opposing Approach Opposing Lanes Conflicting Approach Left Conflicting Lanes Left Conflicting Approach Right Conflicting Lanes Right HCM Control Delay HCM LOS Lane V:13171102‘2017 6 6-7 am yn SBU SBL SBT SBR 23 0.83 2 28 0 SB NB 2 WB 2 EB 2 8.8 A 84 11 0.83 0.83 2 2 101 13 2 0 5/8f2015 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 20 of 48 Synchro 8 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 9: 147th St & access Intersection Int Delay, s/veh Movement EBL EBT Vol, vehlh 10 60 Conflicting Peds, #Ihr 0 0 Sign Control Free Free RT Channelized - None Storage Length - Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow MaloriMinor Maorl Conflicting Flow 1 153 Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1428 Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1428 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS Minor LanefMa'or Mvmt Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.5 V:\3171102\2017 B 8 -7 am.syn 0 83 83 2 2 12 72 ES 1.1 • EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 1428 0.008 7,5 0 A A 0 7 - 0.038 - 9.2 - A - 0.1 WBT WBR SBL SBR 77 50 6 22 0 0 0 0 Free Free Stop Stop - None None 0 0 0 83 2 7 a'or2 0 0 83 83 2 2 93 60 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 21 of 48 83 2 27 Minor2 219 123 96 6.42 6.22 5.42 5.42 3.518 3.318 769 928 902 928 SB 9.2 A 762 928 763 902 920 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: access/Evendale Way & 147th St Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement Vol, vehth Conflicting Peds, #/hr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Ma'oriMinor Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1435 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 ,&Vroach HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS V:\3171\02\2017 B 6-7 am.syn EBL EBT EBR 7 59 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free - None 100 147 4.12 2.218 1435 0 0 83 83 83 2 2 2 8 71 0 E8 0.8 Minor Lane/Ma'or Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn Capacity (veh/h) - 1435 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.006 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 7.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A A A HCM 95th %We Q(veh) 0 WBL WBT WBR 0 122 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free - None 100 0 83 83 83 2 2 2 0 147 0 aor 71 4 12 2.218 1529 1529 0 1529 0 A 0 - 783 - 0.018 9.7 A 0.1 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 22 of 48 5/6/2015 NBL NBT N R SBL SBT SBR 0 7 0 5 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop None 0 0 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop - None 0 83 83 83 2 2 2 0 0 0 NB 0 A - 0 - 0 - 83 83 83 2 2 2 8 0 6 inorl Minor2 238 235 71 235 235 147 - - 88 88 147 147 150 147 88 88 7.12 6.52 622 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 716 666 991 720 666 900 920 822 856 775 853 775 920 822 708 662 991 717 662 900 708 662 717 662 914 817 851 775 847 775 914 817 SB 9.7 A Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: Johnny Cake Ridge Road & access n ach Int Delay, s/veh Movement WBL Vol, veh/h 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 Sign Control Stop RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Stage 1 796 Stage 2 942 - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 676 922 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 676 Stage 1 796 Stage 2 942 HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS 6 V:\3171\02\2017 B 6-7 am.syn 9 A WBR 23 0 Stop None 0 Minor LanelMa'or Mvmt NBT NBRWBLnI SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) 922 1348 HCM Lane WC Ratio 0.03 - HCM Control Delay (s) 9 0 HCM Lane LOS A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0 NBT NBR SBL SBT 182 16 0 119 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free None - None 100 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 83 83 83 83 83 83 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 28 219 19 0 143 Major/Minor Minorl Matorl Major2 Conflicting Flow AU 291 110 0 0 219 Stage 1 219 . Stage 2 72 Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 4.14 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 - 2.22 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 676 922 .. - 1348 NB 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 23 of 48 1348 0 518/2015 II Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: ,lohnncake Rid. ec�Road & 147th St Inte rsection Intersection Delay, slveh Intersection LOS Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR Vol, veh/h 0 71 56 33 0 38 101 43 0 56 292 55 Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0,86 0.86 0.86 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 83 65 38 0 44 117 50 0 65 340 64 Number of Lanes 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 oath EB WB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 2 2 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 HCM Control Delay 12.2 13.2 HCM LOS B B Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2 Vol Left, % 28% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 39% 0% Vol Thru, % 72% 73% 0% 63% 0% 70% 61% 54% Vol Right, % 0% 27% 0% 37% 0% 30% 0% 46% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 202 201 71 89 38 144 171 192 LT Vol 56 0 71 0 38 0 67 0 Through Vol 146 146 0 56 0 101 104 104 RT Vol 0 55 0 33 0 43 0 88 Lane Flow Rate 235 234 83 103 44 167 198 223 Geometry Grp 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Degree of Util (X) 0.439 0,415 0.184 0.208 0.098 0.337 0.384 0,398 Departure Headway (Hd) 6.867 6.531 8.031 7.252 7.966 7.239 6.969 6.441 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 528 554 448 497 452 499 517 561 Service Time 4.567 4.231 5.755 4.976 5.687 4.96 4.691 4.163 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.445 0.422 0.185 0.207 0.097 0.335 0.383 0.398 HCM Control Delay 14.8 13.8 12.6 11.9 11.6 13.6 14 13.4 HCM Lane LOS B 8 B B B B B B HCM 95th-tile Q 2.2 2 0.7 0.8 0.3 1.5 1.8 1.9 V; \3171 02 2017 B 7 -8 am. syn 13.6 8 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 24 of 48 B 56 2 EB 2 WB 2 14.3 8 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnny C Rid e Road & 147th St Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Movement SBU SBL SBT SBR Vol, vehih 0 67 207 88 Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 78 241 102 Number of Lanes 0 0 2 0 ach Opposing Approach Opposing Lanes Conflicting Approach Left Conflicting Lanes Left Conflicting Approach Right Conflicting Lanes Right HCM Control Delay HCM LOS Lane V:1317 0 2017 B 7-8 an syn SB NB 2 WB 2 EB 2 13.7 B Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 25 of 48 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 9: 147th St & access Intersection Int Delay, siveh 0.3 Movement EBL EBT Vol, veh/h 1 177 Conflicting Peds, #Ihr 0 0 Sign Control Free Free RT Channelized None Storage Length - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade, % - 0 Peak Hour Factor 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 Mvmt Flow 1 206 Ma or/Minor Maorl Conflicting Flow All 230 Stage 1 - Stage 2 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1338 Stage 1 - Stage 2 - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1338 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 A adh HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS V:13171\02\2017 B 7-8 am.syn EB 0 WBT WBR SBL SBR 173 25 4 9 0 0 0 0 Free Free Stop Stop None - None Minor LanelMa'or Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) 1338 . - 758 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.001 - 0.02 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 0 9.8 HCM Lane LOS A A - A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.1 0 0 86 86 2 2 201 29 or2 Minor2 424 216 208 6.42 5.42 5.42 3.518 587 820 - - 827 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 26 of 48 0 0 0 86 2 5 SB 9.8 A 86 2 10 216 6.22 3.318 824 586 824 643 - - 820 - - 826 5/812015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 T\&SC 6 access/Evendale Way & 147 h St Interrrection 0.5 Movement EBL EBT E R \oLwehth 14 167 0 Conflicting Peds, #hr 0 0 0 Sign Contro Free Free Free RT Chan nolizod - - None Storage Length - - 100 Vehm Median Storage, # - 0 - Grade.% - D - Peak Hour Factor 88 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 Mvm1F|mw 16 194 0 0 Free O 195 9 0 0 Free Free None - - 100 - 0 - 0 - 86 86 86 2 2 2 0 227 10 a'o /Minor ���� � norl -_- �nor2 Conflicting Flow All 227 O D 194 0 0 455 454 194 454 454 227 Stage 1 - - - - ~ - 227 227 - 227 227 - Stage 2 - - ' ~ - - 228 227 - 227 227 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - 4.12 - - 712 852 0.22 7.12 0.52 822 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - 6.12 552 - 6.12 5.52 - CritineHd*yStg2 - - - - - 6.12 5,52 - 6.12 5.52 Follow-up Hdvy 2218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4l18 O.8 1H Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1341 - - 1879 - 515 502 847 516 502 812 Stage - ' - - - - 776 716 - 776 716 - Platoon blocked, % - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuve 1341 - ' 1379 Mov Cap-2 Maneuve - - - Stage 1 Stage 2 oach N8 �� VV� _-' __-_--' HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 0 Capacity (veh/h) - 1341 - ' 1379 - - 008 MCM Lane VYCRatio - 0.012 - - - - 0.013 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 7.7 0 - 0 - - 11 HCM Lane LOS A A A - A - - B Wenk Traffic Jmpac Study May 8, 2015 27 of 48 NBL NBT N R 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop - - None - 0 - 0 86 86 86 2 2 2 0 0 0 508 495 847 508 495 - 766 707 - 772 716 S SBT SBR 4 0 3 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop ' 0 ' 0 86 86 86 2 2 2 5 0 3 511 485 813 511 495 - 766 716 - 766 707 1 G 5/6/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: Johnn Cake Rid .e Road & access Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0. Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Vol, veh/h 0 10 405 1 0 362 Conflicting Peds, #Thr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized None None - None Storage Length 0 100 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade, % 0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 12 0 0 86 86 2 2 471 1 Ma'or'iMinor Minori Conflicting Flow Al 681 235 Stage 1 471 Stage 2 210 Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5,84 Follow-up Hdwy 3,52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 384 767 Stage 1 594 Stage 2 805 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 384 767 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 384 Stage 1 594 Stage 2 805 A roach HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) VA 71102\2017 B 7-8 am.syn Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT 767 1087 - 0.015 9.8 0 A A 0 0 4.14 2.22 1087 - - 1087 • WB NB 9.8 A 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 28 of 48 0 - 86 86 2 2 0 421 0 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnn Cake Rid .e Road & 147th S Intersection Intersection Delay, s veh 9.3 Intersection LOS A Movement Vol, veh/h 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 Mvmt Flow 0 Number of Lanes 0 Approach Opposing Approach Opposing Lanes Conflicting Approach Left Conflicting Lanes Left Conflicting Approach Right Conflicting Lanes Right HCM Control Delay HCM LOS Lane Vol Left, % Vol Thru, % Vol Right, % Sign Control Traffic Vol by Lane LT Vol Through Vol RT Vol Lane Flow Rate Geometry Grp Degree of Util (X) Departure Headway (Hd) Convergence, Y/14 Cap Service Time HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th-tile Q 10317 0 2017 B 9-10 am.syn EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR 26 0.96 2 27 1 EB WB 2 SB 2 NB 2 9.2 A 61 25 0.96 0.96 2 2 53 26 1 0 0 0.96 2 0 0 27 0.96 2 28 1 WB EB 2 NB 2 SB 2 95 A 87 0.96 2 91 19 0.96 2 20 1 0 NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2 34% 66% 0% Stop 92 31 61 0 96 7 0.149 5.601 Yes 636 3.373 0.151 9,4 A 0.5 0% 100% 61% 0% 39% 0% Stop Stop 100 26 0 26 61 0 39 0 104 27 7 7 0.149 0,047 5.156 6.248 Yes Yes 691 569 2.928 4.029 0.151 0.047 8.8 9.3 A A 0.5 0,1 0% 100% 67% 0% 33% 0% Stop Stop 76 27 0 27 51 25 0 79 28 7 7 0.121 0.048 5.51 6,203 Yes Yes 645 573 3.292 3.981 0.122 0.049 9.1 9.3 A A 0.4 0% 82% 18% Stop 106 0 87 19 110 7 0.171 5.572 Yes 639 3 349 0.172 9.5 A 0.2 0.6 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 29 of 48 49% 51% 0% Stop 118 58 60 0 123 7 0.193 5.66 Yes 631 3.431 0.195 9.8 A 0.7 5/812015 0 31 122 39 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.96 2 2 2 2 0 32 127 41 0 0 2 0 0% 70% 30% Stop 86 0 60 26 90 7 0.129 5.2 Yes 684 2.97 0.132 8.7 A 0.4 NB SB 2 EB 2 WB 2 9.1 A Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnny Cake Ridge Road 147th St Intersecti Intersection Delay, sveh Intersection LOS Movement Vol, veh /h 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 Mvmt Flow 0 Number of Lanes 0 Approach Opposing Approach Opposing Lanes Conflicting Approach Left Conflicting Lanes Left Conflicting Approach Right Conflicting Lanes Right HCM Control Delay HCM LOS Lane V : X3171 102\2817 8 9 -10 amssyn SB NB 2 WB 2 EB 2 9.3 A SBU SBL SBT SBR 58 120 26 0,96 0,96 0.96 2 2 2 60 125 27 0 2 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 30 of 48 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 9: 147th St & access Intersect Int Delay, siveh Movem Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds, #Ihr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow MaloriMinor Majorl Conflicting Fow AU 143 Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1440 Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1440 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 A.ro HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS V:\317 02 017 8 9-10 amsyn 1.8 EBL EBT 12 136 0 0 Free Free - None 0 0 96 96 2 2 12 142 • EB 0.6 Minor Lane/Ma or Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SSW Capacity (veh/h) 1440 756 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.009 - 0.072 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 10.1 HCM Lane LOS A A 8 HCM 95th %We Q(veh) 0 - 0.2 WBT WBR SBL SBR 119 18 38 14 0 0 0 0 Free Free Stop Stop - None - None 0 0 0 0 - 0 96 96 96 96 2 2 2 2 124 19 40 15 Major2 Minor2 300 133 167 6.42 5.42 5,42 - - 3,518 691 893 863 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 31 of 48 SB 10.1 133 6.22 3.318 916 684 916 710 893 854 518/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: access/Evendale Wa & 147th St Intersection Int Delay, siveh 0.2 A. ach HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Vol, vehlh 5 169 0 0 135 20 0 0 0 1 0 2 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized None None - None - • None Storage Length 100 100 - - - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 - 0 0 - Grade, % - 0 - 0 • 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 5 176 0 0 141 21 0 0 0 1 0 2 Major/Minor tviajoril Major2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 141 0 0 176 0 0 328 327 176 327 327 141 Stage 1 - 186 186 141 141 Stage 2 - • - - 142 141 186 186 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 - 4,12 7.12 6,52 6.22 7,12 6.52 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - 6,12 5.52 6.12 5.52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - 2.218 - - 3.518 4,018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 - 1400 - 625 591 867 626 591 907 Stage 1 - - 816 746 - 862 780 Stage 2 - - - 861 780 816 746 Platoon blocked, % - . May Cap-1 Maneuver 1442 1400 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 - - - - - 622 589 867 622 589 813 743 859 780 EB WB NB 0.2 0 0 A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLril EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SUM Capacity (veh/h) 1442 - 1400 - - 788 HCM Lane VIC Ratio - 0,004 - - 0.004 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 7.5 0 - 0 9.6 HCM Lane LOS A A A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0 - 0 V:\3171\02\2017 B 9-10 am.syn Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 32 of 48 SB 9.6 A 516/2015 624 589 907 624 589 859 780 813 743 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: Johnn Cake Rid e Road & access intersection Int Delay, s/veh Movement WBL WRR Vol, vehth 0 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop RT Channelized None Storage Length 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade, % 0 Peak Hour Factor 96 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 Mvmt Flow 0 HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) V 7 02 017 8 9-10 amsyn ch 0 A 96 2 0 Ma'or/Minor Mnorl Conflicting Flow All 272 Stage 1 166 Stage 2 106 Critical Hdwy 684 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 695 960 Stage 1 846 Stage 2 907 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 695 960 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 695 Stage 1 846 Stage 2 907 6.94 WB ,t Minor Lane/Ma or Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT 1410 0 0 A A 0 NBT N R SBL SBT 159 8 0 204 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free - None None 100 0 0 0 0 96 96 96 96 2 2 2 2 166 8 0 212 0 NB 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 33 of 48 6 4.14 2.22 1410 1410 B 0 518/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnny Cake Ridge Road & 147th St Inte rse on Intersection Delay, s /veh 13.4 Intersection LOS B Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR Vol, veh /h 0 97 112 31 0 50 81 37 0 27 164 23 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0 75 0.75 0.75 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 129 149 41 0 67 108 49 0 36 219 31 Number of Lanes 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 roach EB WB NB Opposing Approach WB EB SB Opposing Lanes 2 2 2 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 2 HCM Control Delay 13.6 12.7 12.7 HCM LOS 8 B 8 Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2 Vol Left, % 25% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 22% 0% Vol Thru, % 75% 78% 0% 78% 0% 69% 78% 50% Vol Right, % 0% 22% 0% 22% 0% 31% 0% 50% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 109 105 97 143 50 118 122 189 LT Vol 27 0 97 0 50 0 27 0 Through Vol 82 82 0 112 0 81 95 95 RT Vol 0 23 0 31 0 37 0 94 Lane Flow Rate 145 140 129 191 67 157 163 252 Geometry Grp 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Degree of Util (X) 0.293 0.271 0.275 0.37 0.146 0.311 0.318 0.459 Departure Headway (Hd) 7.256 6.972 7,656 6.99 7.858 7,121 7.03 6.562 Convergence, YIN Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 496 515 469 515 457 505 512 549 Service Time 4.996 4.713 5,395 4.728 5.599 4.861 4.767 4.299 HCM Lane WC Ratio 0.292 0.272 0,275 0.371 0.147 0.311 0.318 0.459 HCM Control Delay 13 12.3 13.3 13.8 11.9 13.1 13 14.8 HCM Lane LOS B B B B B B B B HCM 95th -tile Q 1,2 1.1 1.1 1.7 0.5 1.3 1.4 2.4 V :\3171 \02\2017 B 2 - prn.syn Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 34 of 48 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnny Cake Ridge Road & 147th St Intersection Intersection Delay, siveh Intersection LOS Movement Vol, veh/h 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.75 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 Mvmt Flow 0 Number of Lanes 0 SBU SBL SBT SBR roach Opposing Approach Opposing Lanes Conflicting Approach Left Conflicting Lanes Left Conflicting Approach Right Conflicting Lanes Right HCM Control Delay HCM LOS Lane V:\3171\02\2017 B 2-3 pm.syn 27 0.75 2 36 0 SB NB 2 WB 2 EB 2 14.1 190 94 0.75 0.75 2 2 253 125 2 0 5/8/2015 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 35 of 48 Synchro 8 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 9: 147th St & access Intersection Int Delay, s/veh roa HCM Contro Delay, s HCM LOS Minor Lan&M&or Mvmt Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane ViC Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) Movement EBL EBT Vol, veh/h 5 157 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 Sign Control Free Free RT Channelized None Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade, % 0 Peak Hour Factor 75 75 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 Mvmt Flow 7 209 Ma or/Minor Ma'o Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1346 Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1346 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 V:\3171\022017 B 2 pm.syri 223 E 0.2 1346 0.005 A 0 EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 777 - - - 0.063 0 9.9 A A 0.2 WBT WBR SBL SBR 140 27 9 28 0 0 0 0 Free Free Stop Stop None None 0 0 0 75 2 12 0 0 75 75 2 2 187 36 r2 Minor2 428 205 - - 223 6.42 5.42 5.42 3,518 584 829 814 • Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 36 of 48 SB 9.9 A 75 2 37 205 6.22 3.318 836 580 836 638 829 809 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: access/Evendale Way & 147th St Intersection Int Delay, s/veh Movement Vol, veh/h Conflicting Peds, #/hr Sign Control RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, if Grade, DA) Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Major/Minor Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap-1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Approach HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS Minor Lane/Mao Mvmt Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %file Q(veh) 2.1 VA3171102\20 B 2 pm.syn EBL EBT 'EBR 17 148 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free None 100 Majorl 196 4.12 2.218 1377 1377 0 - 75 75 2 2 23 197 EB 0.8 791 1377 0,02 0.016 9.6 7.7 A A 0.1 0.1 75 2 0 WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 12 147 3 1 0 11 18 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop - None None - None 100 - - 0 0 0 - 0 - 0 - 0 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 196 4 1 0 15 24 0 27 Major2 197 4.12 2,218 1376 1376 0.6 1376 0.012 0 7.6 A A 0 NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL. WBT WBR SBLn1 - 619 - 0.082 0 11,3 A 0.3 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 37 of 48 Minorl Minor2 484 471 197 478 471 196 243 243 228 228 -- 241 228 250 243 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3,318 493 491 844 498 491 845 761 705 775 715 762 715 754 705 466 466 747 728 NB 9.6 A 475 844 475 692 706 477 475 845 477 475 760 706 727 692 SB 11.3 5/6/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: Johnny Cake Ridge Road & access Intersecdon Int Delay, s/veh or/Minor roach HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS VA317 \0212017 B 2-3 pm 0:1 Movement WI3L. WBR Vol, veh/h 0 7 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop RT Channelized None Storage Length 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade, % 0 Peak Hour Factor 75 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 Mvmt Flow 0 Yn NB 9.5 A 75 2 9 Stage 1 391 Stage 2 207 Critical Hdwy 684 6,94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 434 814 Stage 1 653 Stage 2 807 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 434 814 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 434 Stage 1 653 Stage 2 807 Minor LaneiMalor Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) 814 1164 HCM Lane WC Ratio 0.011 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.5 0 HCM Lane LOS A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0 NBT NBR SBL SBT 293 5 0 311 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free None - None 100 0 0 75 75 2 2 0 415 0 0 75 75 2 2 391 7 Conflicting Flow All 598 195 0 0 391 N 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 38 of 48 1aor 4,14 2,22 1164 1164 B 0 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnny Cake Ridge Road & 147th St In on 14.4 B Movement EBU EBL EBT EBR U VOL WBt BR NBU NBL NBT NBR Vol, vehfh 0 93 130 65 0 50 121 87 0 40 264 50 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0,98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 . 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 95 133 66 0 51 123 89 0 41 269 51 Number of Lanes 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 Intersection Delay, s Intersection LOS veh 518/2015 .� +r oach EB WB Opposing Approach WB EB Opposing Lanes 2 2 Conflicting Approach Left SB NB Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 Conflicting Approach Right NB SB Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 HCM Control Delay 14.2 14.7 HCM LOS B B Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 E 0 EBL.n2 1NBLnI WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2 Vol Left, %Q 23% 07a 100% 0% 100% 0% 187 0% Vol Thru, % 77% 73% 0% 67% 0% 58% 82% 62% Vol Right, % 0% 27% 0% 33% 0% 42% 0% 38% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 172 182 93 195 50 208 172 229 LT Vol 40 0 93 0 50 0 31 0 Through Vol 132 132 0 130 0 121 141 141 RT Vol 0 50 0 65 0 87 0 88 Lane Flow Rate 176 186 95 199 51 212 176 234 Geometry Grp 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Degree of Util (X) 0.36 0.365 0,211 0.401 0.114 0.428 0.355 0.449 Departure Headway (Hd) 7,386 7.07 8.008 7.256 8.072 7.257 7.281 6.913 Convergence, YIN Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 486 509 448 495 444 495 493 521 Service Time 5.138 4.822 5.762 5.009 5.827 5.012 5.032 4.664 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.362 0.365 0.212 0.402 0.115 0.428 0.357 0.449 HCM Control Delay 14.3 13.9 12.9 14.8 11.9 15.4 14 15.2 HCM Lane LOS B B B B B C B C HCM 95th-tile Q 1.6 1.7 0.8 1.9 0,4 2.1 1.6 2.3 V13171102'2017 B 4 -5 pm.syn Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 39 of 48 NB SB 2 EB 2 WB 2 14.1 B Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnny Cake Ridge Road & 147th St intersection Intersection Delay, sNeh Intersection LOS Movement Vol, veh/h Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Number of Lanes Approach SB Opposing Approach NB Opposing Lanes 2 Conflicting Approach Left WB Conflicting Lanes Left 2 Conflicting Approach Right EB Conflicting Lanes Right 2 HCM Control Delay 14.7 HCM LOS Lane V:31 71\02\2017 B 4-5 pm. ya SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 31 282 88 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 2 2 2 2 0 32 288 90 0 0 2 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 40 of 48 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 9: 147th St & acces Intersecon Int Delay, slveh Movement Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow 2,6 Vol, vehlh 26 185 Conflicting Peds, #Ihr 0 0 Sign Control Free Free RT Channelized None aor/Minor 'or Conflicting FIow All 252 Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy 4 12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1313 Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1313 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 V:13171\02\2017 B 4-5 prn.syn EBL EBT - 0 0 98 98 2 2 27 189 Approach EB HCM Control Delay, s 1 HCM LOS Minor Lane/Ma'or Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLni Capacity (vehlh) 1313 - 644 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 - - 0.168 HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 - 11.7 HCM Lane LOS A A B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - • 0,6 WBT WBR SBL SBR 229 18 77 29 0 0 0 0 Free Free Stop Stop None None 0 0 0 0 98 98 98 2 2 2 234 18 79 'or2 Minor2 485 243 243 242 6.42 622 5.42 5.42 3.518 3.318 541 796 797 798 529 796 601 - - 797 780 11.7 B Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 41 of 48 98 2 30 5/8/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: access/Evendale Way & 147th St 5/6/2015 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 02 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL. SBT SBR Vol, veh/h 3 258 0 0 241 19 0 0 0 0 0 6 Conflicting Peds, Mr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized None - None - - None None Storage Length - 100 100 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - 0 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - 0 • 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 3 263 0 0 246 19 0 0 0 0 0 6 Major/Minor Majorl MaJor2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 246 0 0 263 0 0 518 515 263 515 515 246 Stage 1 - - 269 269 246 246 Stage 2 - - 249 246 - 269 269 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 4.12 - - 7,12 6,52 6.22 7.12 6.52 612 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - 6.12 5.52 6.12 5.52 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - ... - 6.12 5.52 - 6,12 5,52 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 2.218 - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1320 - 1301 - 468 464 776 470 464 793 Stage 1 - - 737 687 - 758 703 - Stage 2 - - 755 703 737 687 Platoon blocked, % . Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1320 1301 - 463 463 776 469 463 793 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 463 463 469 463 Stage 1 735 685 - 756 703 Stage 2 - 749 703 - 735 685 Approach EB HCM Control Delay, s 0.1 HCM LOS VA3171\0212017 B 4-5 pm.syn 0 Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) - 1320 1301 - 793 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.002 40 - .. 0.008 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 7,7 0 0 - 9.6 HCM Lane LOS A A A A - A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0 0 - 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 42 of 48 NB SB 0 9,6 A A Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: Johnn Cake Rid .e Road & access Intersection Int Delay, siveh Movement WBL Vol, vehlh 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 Sign Control Stop RT Channelized Storage Length Veh in Median Storage, # Grade, % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow MO./Minor Minorl Conflicting Flow All 636 215 Stage 1 431 Stage 2 205 Critical Hdwy 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Crica Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 410 790 Stage 1 623 Stage 2 809 Platoon blocked, lo Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 410 790 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 410 Stage 1 623 Stage 2 809 .'r oach HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWB n1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) VA3171 ‘02‘2017 B 4-5 pm.syn WBR NBT NBR 5131. SBT 0 422 22 0 402 0 0 0 0 0 Stop Free Free Free Free None - None - None - 0 100 - 0 0 0 0 - 0 - - 0 98 98 98 98 98 98 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 431 22 0 410 B 0 - 1125 0 0 A A 0 Major2 0 0 431 414 2.22 1125 NB 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 43 of 48 1125 0 5/812015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnn Cake Rid • e Road 147th St Intersection Intersection Delay, sfveh Intersection LOS Movement Vol, vehfh Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Number of Lanes A oach Opposing Approach Opposing Lanes Conflicting Approach Left Conflicting Lanes Left Conflicting Approach Right Conflicting Lanes Right HCM Control Delay HCM LOS V :13171 \02\2017 B 5.6 pm.syn 7, C EBU EBL EBT EBR WBU WBL WBT WBR NBU NBL NBT NBR 0 99 127 85 0 27 81 61 0 41 0,90 0.90 0:90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 110 141 94 0 30 90 68 0 46 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 EB WB 2 SB 2 NB 2 16.6 C WB EB 2 NB 2 SB 2 14.6 B Lane NBLn 1 NBLn2 EBLn 1 EBL/12 WBLn 1 WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2 Vol Left, % 23% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 25 %© 0% Vol Thru, % 77% 72% 0% 60% 0% 57% 75% 62% Vol Right, % 0% 28% 0% 40% 0% 43 % 0% 38% Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Traffic Vol by Lane 177 190 99 212 27 142 235 284 LT Vol 41 0 99 0 27 0 59 0 Through Vol 136 136 0 127 0 81 176 176 RT Vol 0 54 0 85 0 61 0 108 Lane Flow Rate 196 211 110 236 30 158 261 316 Geometry Grp 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Degree of Util (X) 0.42 0.432 0.257 0.497 0.073 0.349 0.541 0,618 Departure Headway (Hd) 7.714 7.389 8.402 7.598 8.802 7.973 7.455 7.054 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Cap 467 486 427 473 406 450 483 511 Service Time 5.475 5.151 6.162 5.358 6.57 5.741 5.213 4.811 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.42 0,434 0.258 0.499 0,074 0.351 0.54 0.618 HCM Control Delay 16 15.7 14.1 17.7 12.3 15 18.7 20.6 HCM Lane LOS CC B C B B C C HCM 95th -tile Q 2 2.1 1 2.7 0.2 1.5 3.2 4.1 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 44 of 48 NB SB 2 EB 2 WB 2 15.8 C 5/6/2015 271 54 0,90 0.90 2 2 301 60 2 0 1 # Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 AWSC 3: Johnny Cake Ridge Road & 147th St Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Movement Vol, vehlh Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvmt Flow Number of Lanes roach Opposing Approach Opposing Lanes Conflicting Approach Left Conflicting Lanes Left Conflicting Approach Right Conflicting Lanes Right HCM Control Delay HCM LOS Lane V:13 7 02 17 B 5-6 pm.syn SBU SBL SBT SBR 0 59 352 108 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90 2 2 2 2 0 66 391 120 0 0 2 0 SB NB 2 WB 2 EB 2 19.7 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 45 of 48 5/6/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 TWSC 9: 147th St & access ntersecuon Int Delay, s/veh Movement Vol, vett) Conflicting Peds, /hr Sign Control RT Channelized Major/ Minor Majorl Conflicting Flow All 184 Stage 1 Stage 2 - Critical Hdwy 412 Cribcal Hdwy Stg 1 - Critical Hdwy Stg Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1391 Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1391 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 St 2 At .roach HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS 0.1 EBL EBT 0 240 0 0 Free Free None Storage Length - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade, % - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 267 .14 Minor Lane/M or M vmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane V/C Ratio HCM Control Delay (s) HCM Lane LOS HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) V:13171102\2017 B 5-6 prn.syn 91 0 A 0 - 786 - 0,006 - - 9.6 A - - 0 WBT WBR SBL SBR Major2 166 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 Free Free Stop Stop - None None 0 0 0 0 0 90 90 90 90 2 2 2 2 184 0 1 3 0 Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 46 of 48 Minor2 451 184 184 267 6.42 6.22 5.42 5.42 3.518 3.318 566 858 848 778 566 858 627 848 778 .6 A 516/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 6: access/Evendale Way & 147th St Intersection Int Delay, siveh 0.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR V�� xV�T WBR Vu[voh/h 0 241 0 0 106 0 Conflicting Peds #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None Storage Length 100 - 100 Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 Grade, % - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles a/0 2 2 2 IA /Minor ��n Conflicting Flow All 184 Stage 1 - Stage 2 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - Follow-up Hdwv 2.218 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1391 Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuve 1391 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 . & . proach HCM Control Do y, s HCM LOS 0 - D - 0 90 90 90 2 2 2 0 184 0 a*or2 Minud 268 O O 452 452 260 452 452 184 - - - 268 268 - 184 184 - - - - 184 184 - 268 268 - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 622 7.12 6.52 6.22 - - - 6.12 5,52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - 6.12 5,52 - 6.12 5.52 - 2.218 - - 35 B 4018 3.318 3.518 4,018 3.318 1296 - - 518 503 771 518 503 858 - - - 738 687 - 818 747 - - 818 747 738 687 0 Minor Mvmt N8Ln1 EBL EBT EBR WBL \VBT VVBRSBLn1 Capacity (vmh/h) - 1391 - - 1296 - - 518 MCM Lane \VCRatio - - ~ - - - - 0.004 HCM Control Delay (s) 0 0 - - 0 - - 12 HCM Lane LOS A A - ~ A - - B Wenk Traffic Impac Study May 8, 2015 47 of 48 NBL NBT NBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stop Stop Stop - None - - - 0 ' - 0 ' 90 90 90 2 2 2 0 0 0 NB SB 0 12 A D 5/6/2015 SBL 8T SBR 2 0 0 0 0 0 - - None 0 - ' 0 - 90 90 90 2 2 2 2 0 0 1296 518 503 771 518 503 858 - - - - - - 818 503 - 518 503 - - - - ' 738 687 - 818 747 - - - - - 818 747 - 738 687 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 TWSC 2: Johnn Cake Rid .e Road & access Intersection Int Delay, siveh Movement W L W R NBT NBR $BL SBT Vol, vehth 0 1 431 0 0 519 Conflicting Peds, Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None None • None Storage Length 0 - 100 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 1 479 0 0 577 Malor/Minor Minorl Maiori Major2 Conflicting Flow All 767 239 0 0 479 Stage 1 479 Stage 2 286 Critical Hdwy 6.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.84 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 3.32 2.22 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 339 762 - 1080 Stage 1 589 - - Stage 2 735 - Platoon blocked, % Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 339 762 1080 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 339 Stage 1 589 Stage 2 735 App roach HCM Control Delay, s HCM LOS V:3171\02\2017 B 5-6 pm.syn . , Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLnI SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h) - 762 1080 HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0,001 - - HCM Control Delay (s) - 93 0 - HCM Lane LOS A A HCM 95th %tile queh) 0 0 6.94 WB NB SB 9,7 0 0 A Wenk Traffic Impact Study May 8, 2015 48 of 48 4 14 5/6/2015 Synchro 8 Report Page 1 ISD 196 Transportation Hub Planning Commission Meeting July 15, 2015 Summary of Project - Requested Land Use Actions 1.Subdivision by Preliminary Plat to create 10.2- acre lot and outlot. 2.Conditional Use Permit for Operation of Bus Storage and Maintenance Facility. 3.Conditional Use Permit for Screened Storage Area of Maximum 6 buses 4.Site Plan Review/Building Permit Authorization for 60,000 sq. ft. Transportation Hub. Location 2030 Comprehensive Plan Comp Plan Excerpts “An important value of the City is to preserve the vitality, • social interaction and cohesiveness of residential neighborhoods. One technique that can support this value is to require buffers… (p. 4-4).” “The City uses buffersto help … separate... portions of land • uses that have the potential to impact adjacent properties and/or neighborhoods (p. 4-4).” “Desirable uses in employment areas should consist of office, • office-showroom, services, medical, health care, research and development and forms of light industrial land use that produce minimal noise, odor, or other forms of pollution. Undesirable uses are those that have high levels of noise, traffic congestion, odor, dust, vibration, lighting, and unmitigated contamination (pp. 4-5 to 4-6).” Zoning Conditional Uses Definition of Conditional Use: a use that is “generally not • suitable in a particular zoning district, but which may, under some circumstances, be suitable.” A conditional use permit is appropriate “if it is • determined that the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the comprehensive guide plan and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and would not be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.” Preliminary Plat Landscape Plan (Revised) Site Renderings View from Upper 147 th Street Looking North View from Evendale Way Cul-de-Sac Looking West Site Renderings View from Johnny Cake Ridge Road Looking East Project Review to Date May 20, 2015 –Planning Commission Meeting –Public Hearing • Opened and Continued June 17, 2015 –Planning Commission Meeting –Public Hearing • held, additional comments received, hearing closed. July 2, 2015 –Meeting w/Neighborhood Representatives • July 6, 2015 –Meeting w/Scottsbriar Neighborhood • Issues Discussed: • Operation of this facility compared with other facilities visited. • Site Selection –Why this site selected? • Noise/Noise Study • North Screening Fence • Traffic • Property Values • Planning Review Process • Zoning Issues • Noise Study Findings 1.Greatest noise impacts will occur in afternoon when all buses return and enter garage from north garage doors between 3:30 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. 2.Noise from morning departing buses will be screened by the closed north garage doors. All buses pull forward and leave garage through south doors. 3.Studied fence height options-12’ fence provides best sound attenuation. 4.Noise levels do not exceed MPCA daytime levels. Examples of Noise Levels Source: MPCA, A Guide to Noise Control in Minnesota Noise Study Recommendations Noise Consultant’s Responses to Additional Questions 1.Which provides better noise attenuation, wood or masonry? Solid wood ¾” fence provides attenuation; 1-1/2” fence proposed. • Height of fence is more important than material due to “spillover.” • Masonry can attenuate more sound energy, but will be no better than • wood fence for stopping “spillover” sound. 2.What about noise screening for properties to the east? Closest home is approximately 700 feet from nearest bus travel path. • Maximum expected noise level is 42 dBA which is ambient level. • 3.Increasing the height of the fence by 50% does not improve its efficacy –only 2 to 3 dBA additional noise abatement achieved. Does that mean the fence material is a poor quality material? Assuming ¾” solid fence constructed, height more important than • material. Would need to increase fence by 4’ to achieve 2 dBA additional • mitigation Fence on North Property Line Fence on North Property Line Fence Cross Sections Fence Heights 8’ Tall Fence 12’ Tall Fence Traffic Study 1.When will warrants be met for U. 147Street and th Johnny Cake Ridge Road signalization? Already difficult to exit the neighborhood from 144Street. th 2.How will traffic 142Street and Johnny Cake and 147 ndth Street and Pilot Knob Road be affected? 3.Traffic study supplied by ISD 196 does not include “shuffling” of buses. 4.Concern that backed up traffic on U. 147Street will th lead to more cut-through traffic through the neighborhood. Property Values Cedar Isle Estates & City CMF Rolling Ridge, Kerry Addition & Diamond Path ISD 196 Bus Facility Review Process 1.Two public hearings were held and then closed prior to receiving information on all of the issues. 2.City is not providing advocacy on behalf of the neighborhood. 3.Details regarding the facility have changed frequently. Only time neighbors see changes is in the Planning Commission packet. 4.Reports that adjacent neighbors were not notified of the project. 5.Neighborhood doesn’t want the City to take action until all of the outstanding items have been addressed. 6.Petition has been submitted. Zoning Issues 1.Doesn’t §155.356 of the City Code prohibit overhead doors from facing collector and arterial streets? 2.A 12’ fence requires a variance. 3.Buses are located primarily in heavy industrial areas. 4.What is the purpose of a conditional use permit? Recommended Actions: One of three actions: (1) Recommend approval with conditions, (2) Recommend denial with findings, or (3) Direct staff to work with the petitioner to provide additional information to be presented at the next Planning Commission meeting. To recommend approval, the following motions are suggested: Recommended Actions 1.Recommend approval of the subdivision by preliminary plat of Eagle Ridge Business Park Second Addition, subject to compliance with all City Codes and Ordinances and the following conditions: a.Aminimum10’drainageandutilityeasementshallbededicated behindEvendaleWayright-of-wayonOutlotA. b.Acash-in-lieuoflandparklanddedicationshallberequiredin accordancewiththeCity’sdedicationformulainthesubdivision ordinance. c.Stormwaterponddedicationhasbeenpreviouslysatisfied. d.Drainageandutilityeasementsshallbededicatedforafuturewell siteandwatermainasnotedintheAssistantCityEngineer’smemo ofJune12,2015. e.AdevelopmentagreementbetweentheSchoolDistrictandCity whichprovidesthetermsandconditionsoftheinstallationand paymentofthecostforfutureroadimprovementswhichmaybe neededwhenthefacilityexpandsinthefutureshallbeexecuted andrecordedasaconditionofthefinalplatapproval. Recommended Actions 2.Recommend approval of a conditional use permit to construct a 60,000 sq. ft. transportation hub facility including bus storage, bus maintenance, fueling and bus wash, subject to approval of the Preliminary Plat of Eagle Ridge Second Addition, and compliance with all City Code and Ordinances and the following conditions: a.The transportation hub shall be screened from the residential properties to the north by a 12’ tall articulated wood privacy fence with landscaping on both sides of the fence as depicted in the July 6, 2015, fence location plan. The final fence location and planting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planner prior to issuance of the building permit. Recommended Actions b.Thenorthgaragedoorsofthebusgarageshallremain closedduringoperatinghoursexceptwhenanindividual busesareentersingthegaragefromthenorth.After thebusentersthegarage,thenorthdoorshallbe closed. c.Thegaragedoorsonthemaintenancebaysandbus washshallremainclosedpriorto7:00a.m.andafter 8:00p.m.Thedoorsmaybeopenedduringthistime, butthenclosedoncethevehiclehasbeenparkedinthe garageentersthebuswashorrepairbay. d.TheSchoolDistrictshallestablishacontactpersonwho willreceivephonecallsifneighboringpropertieshave concernsregardingtheTransportationHubfacility. e.Thefacilityoperatinghoursshallbelimitedto5:30a.m. to8:00p.m. Recommended Actions 3.Recommend approval of a conditional use permit to construct a 2,700 sq. ft. storage area for a maximum of 6 buses, subject to approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the Operation of a Bus Storage and Maintenance Facility and compliance with all City Codes and Ordinances and the following conditions: a.The outdoor area shall be paved. b.An 8’ tall maintenance-free fence shall be used to screen the storage area. c.The overnight storage of buses shall be limited to the screened storage area. Recommended Actions 4.Recommend approval of the site plan and give building permit authorization subject to the approval of the Preliminary Plat of Eagle Ridge Second Addition and a Conditional Use Permit to Operate a Bus Maintenance and Storage Facility and compliance with all City Codes and Ordinances and the following conditions: a.Inaccordancewith§155.351(E),theCityauthorizesthe constructionofthe12’tallarticulatedfencealongthenorth propertylinetoscreenthesitefromtheresidentialpropertiesto thenorth. b.Thegaragedoorsshallbepaintedacolorthatcomplementsthe coloroftheexteriorbuildingmaterialcolor. c.Thegaragedoorsshallbeinsulatedandconstructedofaninside andoutsidelayerof25gagesteelwith2”polystyrenebetweenfor insulation. Recommended Actions d.Airhandlingunitsshallbeinstalledonthesouthsideofthebus garagewhicharesizedtoallowforthebusestoidleduringthe pre-tripsafetycheckwiththenorthgaragedoorsclosed. e.Thenorthfenceshallbeinstalledaftersitegradingandpriorto constructiontoscreentheresidentialpropertiestothenorth. f.Theplansshallberevisedtoaddresstheissuesidentifiedinthe AssistantCityEngineer’sJune12,2015,memo. Council Actions Related to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan •May, 2009 “Staff is directed to review and update the City Council every five years on development and continued viability of the Mixed Business Campus as set forth in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update.” •January, 2010 “The updated Apple Valley Comprehensive Guide Plan is adopted.” q 2030 Comprehensive Plan A Guide for Economic Development •More households. •More jobs. •Jobs that support households. •New job choices for 18,000 to 20,000 that commute elsewhere on a daily basis. •A population of 71,200 and 22,000 jobs in 2030 is forecasted. As of September 2014 Population Households Employment 2020 City58,14023,25019,120 2020 Met Council56,20022,50017,300 2030 City68,00028,40022,000 2030 Met Council 62,40025,20019,100 2040 City71,20029,50023,000 2040 Met Council 65,60026,50019,500 Select Demographic Data in Support of Economic Development Apple Burnsville EaganApple Valley Valley 2030 Met Council 2005 Land Use Comparisons Residential 55%40.3%38.9%50% Total Commercial 5%7.1%5.9%5% Total Industrial Total 7.4%8.8%7.9%4.7% (closest comparison to I +MBC mixed business campus) Institution & 19.5%21.3%23.3%18.5% Recreation The South Central Planning Area Analysis by Owner, Fischer in 2007 •Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) •Up to 3 million sq. ft. of office, commercial, industrial, and warehouse uses •Up to 2,260 housing units •Environmental impacts are identified, managed, and mitigated q q MBC by the Numbers •After roads/parks/ponding; about 200 to 210 acres for development •The sq. ft. of development ranges from about 2.7 million to 3.2 million •About 55% is single and multi-tenant, office and light industry (approx. 110 acres) •About 20% is for healthcare, clinics, training (approx. 40 acres) •About 20% is for medium density housing (approx. 40 acres & 1,100 units) •The balance, about 5% or 100,000 sq. ft., is for retail •The number of jobs created ranges from 7,600 to 9,300 Office/Medical and Housing/Retail Areas q q q 2015 –Next Steps/Work Plan •Multiple PC meetings that assist to “review and update the City Council” •Upcoming: Land Use actions and marketing initiatives the last five years •Upcoming: The market place today Similar? Different? •Upcoming: SWAT Analysis Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats